Implant Materials in Spinal Surgery

2012 ◽  
pp. 17-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Werner Schmoelz
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Implant Materials

scholarly journals Research progress on the biological modifications of implant materials in 3D printed intervertebral fusion cages

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shan Li ◽  
Yifan Huan ◽  
Bin Zhu ◽  
Haoxiang Chen ◽  
Ming Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Research Progress ◽  
Advanced Manufacturing ◽  
Intervertebral Fusion ◽  
Implant Materials ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Metal Materials ◽  
Fusion Cage ◽  
Implant Displacement

AbstractAnterior spine decompression and reconstruction with bone grafts and fusion is a routine spinal surgery. The intervertebral fusion cage can maintain intervertebral height and provide a bone graft window. Titanium fusion cages are the most widely used metal material in spinal clinical applications. However, there is a certain incidence of complications in clinical follow-ups, such as pseudoarticulation formation and implant displacement due to nonfusion of bone grafts in the cage. With the deepening research on metal materials, the properties of these materials have been developed from being biologically inert to having biological activity and biological functionalization, promoting adhesion, cell differentiation, and bone fusion. In addition, 3D printing, thin-film, active biological material, and 4D bioprinting technology are also being used in the biofunctionalization and intelligent advanced manufacturing processes of implant devices in the spine. This review focuses on the biofunctionalization of implant materials in 3D printed intervertebral fusion cages. The surface modifications of implant materials in metal endoscopy, material biocompatibility, and bioactive functionalizationare summarized. Furthermore, the prospects and challenges of the biofunctionalization of implant materials in spinal surgery are discussed.

The “Mixing” of Implant Systems

1991 ◽  
Vol 4 (02) ◽  
pp. 38-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Baumgart
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Bone Screw ◽  
Application Technique ◽  
Quality Controls ◽  
Implant Materials ◽  
Osteosynthesis Plate ◽  
Potential Problems ◽  
Manufacturing Procedure

SummaryThe so-called “mixing” of implants and instruments from different producers entertain certain risks.The use of standardized implant materials (e.g. stainless steel ISO 5832/1) from different producers is necessary but is not sufficient to justify the use of an osteosynthesis plate from one source and a bone screw from another.The design, dimensions, tolerances, manufacturing procedure, quality controls, and application technique of the instruments and implants also vary according to make. This can lead to damage, failure or fracture of the biomechanical system called “osteosynthesis” and hence the failure of the treatment undertaken. In the end, it is the patient who pays for these problems.Some examples also illustrate the potential problems for the staff and institutions involved.The use of a unique, consistent, well-tested, and approved set of implants and instruments is to be strongly recommended to avoid any additional risk.

Stellenwert der Navigation

2017 ◽  
Vol 01 (04) ◽  
pp. 317-334
Author(s):  
Jan-Sven Jarvers ◽  
Ulrich Spiegl ◽  
Stefan Glasmacher ◽  
Christoph Heyde ◽  
Christoph Josten
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Intraoperative Imaging ◽  
Intraoperative Navigation ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Tumor Diseases ◽  
Intraoperative Control ◽  
Improved Technology

Abstract Importance of Navigation Navigation and intraoperative imaging have undergone an enormous development in recent years. By using intraoperative navigation, the precision of pedicle screw implantation can be increased in the sense of patient safety. Especially in the case of complex defects or tumor diseases, navigation is a decisive aid. As a result of the constantly improved technology, the requirements for reduced radiation exposure and intraoperative control can also be met. The high costs of the devices can be amortized, for example by a reduced number of revisions. This overview presents the principles of navigation in spinal surgery and the advantages and disadvantages of the different navigation procedures.

Image-Guided Spinal Surgery and Robotics in MIS: Where Are We Now?

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Chiung Chyi Shen
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Surgical Navigation ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Intraoperative Imaging ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Navigation Systems ◽  
Image Guided

Use of pedicle screws is widespread in spinal surgery for degenerative, traumatic, and oncological diseases. The conventional technique is based on the recognition of anatomic landmarks, preparation and palpation of cortices of the pedicle under control of an intraoperative C-arm (iC-arm) fluoroscopy. With these conventional methods, the median pedicle screw accuracy ranges from 86.7% to 93.8%, even if perforation rates range from 21.1% to 39.8%.The development of novel intraoperative navigational techniques, commonly referred to as image-guided surgery (IGS), provide simultaneous and multiplanar views of spinal anatomy. IGS technology can increase the accuracy of spinal instrumentation procedures and improve patient safety. These systems, such as fluoroscopy-based image guidance ("virtual fluoroscopy") and computed tomography (CT)-based computer-guidance systems, have sensibly minimized risk of pedicle screw misplacement, with overall perforation rates ranging from between 14.3% and 9.3%, respectively."Virtual fluoroscopy" allows simultaneous two-dimensional (2D) guidance in multiple planes, but does not provide any axial images; quality of images is directly dependent on the resolution of the acquired fluoroscopic projections. Furthermore, computer-assisted surgical navigation systems decrease the reliance on intraoperative imaging, thus reducing the use of intraprocedure ionizing radiation. The major limitation of this technique is related to the variation of the position of the patient from the preoperative CT scan, usually obtained before surgery in a supine position, and the operative position (prone). The next technological evolution is the use of an intraoperative CT (iCT) scan, which would allow us to solve the position-dependent changes, granting a higher accuracy in the navigation system. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document