Literature DB >> 33122181

Load Share Mapping for Traditional PEEK vs Novel Hybrid PEEK With Expandable Porous Mesh Intervertebral Devices.

Lisa A Ferrara1, Pierce D Nunley2, Marcus B Stone2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A successful intervertebral fusion requires biomechanical stability created by the structural support of the interbody device and loading of the bone graft material to accelerate mechanotransduction and bone remodeling. The objective of this study was to generate a quantitative map of the contact area and stress profile for 2 implant designs; a rigid monolithic polyetheretherketone (PEEK) lateral cage (MPLC), and a unique hybrid interbody design, which includes PEEK terminal supports surrounding an expandable porous mesh (P+EPM) that serves to contain bone graft.
METHODS: The construct for each test consisted of a device sandwiched between 2 flat or shaped Grade 15 foam blocks. Pressure sensitive film and thin film sensors were placed between the device and each of the foam blocks. A series of each implant type was compressed at a rate 0.1 mm/second for 2 loads (1100 N and 2000 N) with and without bone graft. Device and bone graft contact area were analyzed for each test condition and corresponding load profiles were quantified and mapped.
RESULTS: P+EPM demonstrated 34% greater graft volume than MPLC resulting in a 28% larger area for bone exchange when filled. The load profiles for all applied loading paradigms for P+EPM demonstrated significant direct loading on the bone graft contained within the mesh, resulting in at least 170% greater loaded area than MPLC. Furthermore, the P+EPM demonstrated load sharing with the terminal PEEK supports. MPLC for all loading conditions demonstrated negligible bone graft loading.
CONCLUSIONS: P+EPM allows for an optimized contact area for bone exchange and graft incorporation. The load profiles confirmed that the filled mesh does not stress shield terminal PEEK supports and will load share. The expandable, compliant, porous mesh provides a greater multiplanar area for bone exchange and allows for direct contact with the viscoelastic vertebral endplates, improving the endplate and graft interface mechanics. This manuscript is generously published free of charge by ISASS, the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery.
Copyright © 2020 ISASS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dacron mesh; biomechanics; lumbar spine fusion; pressure testing

Year:  2020        PMID: 33122181      PMCID: PMC7735470          DOI: 10.14444/7134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2211-4599


  16 in total

1.  Intervertebral disc viscoelastic parameters and residual mechanics spatially quantified using a hybrid confined/in situ indentation method.

Authors:  Arin M Ellingson; David J Nuckley
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2011-12-22       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Cancellous bone osseointegration is enhanced by in vivo loading.

Authors:  Bettina M Willie; Xu Yang; Natalie H Kelly; Jane Han; Turya Nair; Timothy M Wright; Marjolein C H van der Meulen; Mathias P G Bostrom
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 3.056

3.  Subsidence of stand-alone cervical carbon fiber cages.

Authors:  Ronald H M A Bartels; Roland D Donk; Ton Feuth
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 4.  Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part II. In vitro studies.

Authors:  L F Cooper; T Masuda; P K Yliheikkilä; D A Felton
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  1998 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 5.  Spine update lumbar interbody cages.

Authors:  B K Weiner; R D Fraser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Monitoring the osseointegration process in porous Ti6Al4V implants produced by additive manufacturing: an experimental study in sheep.

Authors:  Mehmet C Kayacan; Yakup B Baykal; Tamer Karaaslan; Koray Özsoy; İlker Alaca; Burhan Duman; Yunus E Delikanlı
Journal:  J Appl Biomater Funct Mater       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.604

7.  Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels.

Authors:  A Katsuura; S Hukuda; Y Saruhashi; K Mori
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Radiologic Assessment of Subsidence in Stand-Alone Cervical Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage.

Authors:  Sung-Kon Ha; Jung-Yul Park; Se-Hoon Kim; Dong-Jun Lim; Sang-Dae Kim; Sang-Kook Lee
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2008-12-31

9.  Load-sharing through elastic micro-motion accelerates bone formation and interbody fusion.

Authors:  Eric H Ledet; Glenn P Sanders; Darryl J DiRisio; Joseph C Glennon
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  A unique modular implant system enhances load sharing in anterior cervical interbody fusion: a finite element study.

Authors:  Vivek Palepu; Ali Kiapour; Vijay K Goel; James M Moran
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 2.819

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.