Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature
The use of interbody implants for spinal fusion has been steadily increasing to avoid the risks of complications and donor site morbidity when using autologous bone. Understanding the pros and cons of various implant designs can assist the surgeon in choosing the ideal interbody for each individual...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-03-01
|
| Series: | Bioengineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/9/3/108 |
| _version_ | 1827649863261618176 |
|---|---|
| author | Cameron Kia Christopher L. Antonacci Ian Wellington Heeren S. Makanji Sean M. Esmende |
| author_facet | Cameron Kia Christopher L. Antonacci Ian Wellington Heeren S. Makanji Sean M. Esmende |
| author_sort | Cameron Kia |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The use of interbody implants for spinal fusion has been steadily increasing to avoid the risks of complications and donor site morbidity when using autologous bone. Understanding the pros and cons of various implant designs can assist the surgeon in choosing the ideal interbody for each individual patient. The goal of these interbody cages is to promote a surface area for bony ingrowth while having the biomechanical properties to support the axial skeleton. Currently, the majority of interbody implants consists of metal or polyether ether ketone (PEEK) cages with bone graft incorporated inside. Titanium alloy implants have been commonly used, however, the large difference in modulus of elasticity from bone has inherent issues. PEEK implants have a desirable surface area with the benefit of a modulus of elasticity closer to that of bone. Unfortunately, clinically, these devices have had increased risk of subsidence. More recently, 3D printed implants have come into the market, providing mechanical stability with increased surface design for bony ingrowth. While clinical outcomes studies are limited, early results have demonstrated more reliable and quicker fusion rates using 3D custom interbody devices. In this review, we discuss the biology of osseointegration, the use of surface coated implants, as well as the potential benefits of using 3D printed interbodies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T20:06:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-192fcef052fb4816a17aecc98bc7f064 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2306-5354 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T20:06:28Z |
| publishDate | 2022-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Bioengineering |
| spelling | doaj.art-192fcef052fb4816a17aecc98bc7f0642023-11-24T00:30:19ZengMDPI AGBioengineering2306-53542022-03-019310810.3390/bioengineering9030108Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the LiteratureCameron Kia0Christopher L. Antonacci1Ian Wellington2Heeren S. Makanji3Sean M. Esmende4Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06032, USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06032, USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06032, USABone and Joint Institute, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT 06106, USABone and Joint Institute, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT 06106, USAThe use of interbody implants for spinal fusion has been steadily increasing to avoid the risks of complications and donor site morbidity when using autologous bone. Understanding the pros and cons of various implant designs can assist the surgeon in choosing the ideal interbody for each individual patient. The goal of these interbody cages is to promote a surface area for bony ingrowth while having the biomechanical properties to support the axial skeleton. Currently, the majority of interbody implants consists of metal or polyether ether ketone (PEEK) cages with bone graft incorporated inside. Titanium alloy implants have been commonly used, however, the large difference in modulus of elasticity from bone has inherent issues. PEEK implants have a desirable surface area with the benefit of a modulus of elasticity closer to that of bone. Unfortunately, clinically, these devices have had increased risk of subsidence. More recently, 3D printed implants have come into the market, providing mechanical stability with increased surface design for bony ingrowth. While clinical outcomes studies are limited, early results have demonstrated more reliable and quicker fusion rates using 3D custom interbody devices. In this review, we discuss the biology of osseointegration, the use of surface coated implants, as well as the potential benefits of using 3D printed interbodies.https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/9/3/108orthopedicsspineinterbodyfusion3D printing |
| spellingShingle | Cameron Kia Christopher L. Antonacci Ian Wellington Heeren S. Makanji Sean M. Esmende Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature Bioengineering orthopedics spine interbody fusion 3D printing |
| title | Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature |
| title_full | Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature |
| title_fullStr | Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature |
| title_full_unstemmed | Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature |
| title_short | Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature |
| title_sort | spinal implant osseointegration and the role of 3d printing an analysis and review of the literature |
| topic | orthopedics spine interbody fusion 3D printing |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/9/3/108 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cameronkia spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature AT christopherlantonacci spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature AT ianwellington spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature AT heerensmakanji spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature AT seanmesmende spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature |