Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kia, Cameron, Antonacci, Christopher L., Wellington, Ian, Makanji, Heeren S., Esmende, Sean M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8944949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35324797
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9030108
_version_ 1784673833847881728
author Kia, Cameron
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Wellington, Ian
Makanji, Heeren S.
Esmende, Sean M.
author_facet Kia, Cameron
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Wellington, Ian
Makanji, Heeren S.
Esmende, Sean M.
author_sort Kia, Cameron
collection PubMed
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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8944949
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89449492022-03-25 Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature Kia, Cameron Antonacci, Christopher L. Wellington, Ian Makanji, Heeren S. Esmende, Sean M. Bioengineering (Basel) Review 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. MDPI 2022-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8944949/ /pubmed/35324797 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9030108 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Kia, Cameron
Antonacci, Christopher L.
Wellington, Ian
Makanji, Heeren S.
Esmende, Sean M.
Spinal Implant Osseointegration and the Role of 3D Printing: An Analysis and Review of the Literature
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 Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8944949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35324797
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9030108
work_keys_str_mv AT kiacameron spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature
AT antonaccichristopherl spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature
AT wellingtonian spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature
AT makanjiheerens spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature
AT esmendeseanm spinalimplantosseointegrationandtheroleof3dprintingananalysisandreviewoftheliterature