Computer-Designed PEEK Implants

Ng, Zhi Yang; Nawaz, Irfan

doi:10.1097/scs.0b013e3182a2f7b6

Cited by 58 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A pore size of 350 μm provided an optimal mechanical shielding to the surrounding bone and osteoconduction of the implant itself. Other materials such as bioceramics [48] and polymers like polyetheretherketon (PEEK) [49] can now be custom-designed, but are currently being studied only at the pre-clinical stage. Polycaprolactone/hydroxyapatite (PCL/HAP) scaffolds (NCT03232788, 20 patients in test group, currently recruiting) will be explored for the treatment of gingival recession associated with bone and gingival tissue deficiency.…”

Section: Bone Graft Substitutes: Optimization Of Implant Design Strumentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone regeneration strategies: Engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone fractures are the most common traumatic injuries in humans. The repair of bone fractures is a regenerative process that recapitulates many of the biological events of embryonic skeletal development. Most of the time it leads to successful healing and the recovery of the damaged bone. Unfortunately, about 5-10% of fractures will lead to delayed healing or non-union, more so in the case of co-morbidities such as diabetes. In this article, we review the different strategies to heal bone defects using synthetic bone graft substitutes, biologically active substances and stem cells. The majority of currently available reviews focus on strategies that are still at the early stages of development and use mostly in vitro experiments with cell lines or stem cells. Here, we focus on what is already implemented in the clinics, what is currently in clinical trials, and what has been tested in animal models. Treatment approaches can be classified in three major categories: i) synthetic bone graft substitutes (BGS) whose architecture and surface can be optimized; ii) BGS combined with bioactive molecules such as growth factors, peptides or small molecules targeting bone precursor cells, bone formation and metabolism; iii) cell-based strategies with progenitor cells combined or not with active molecules that can be injected or seeded on BGS for improved delivery. We review the major types of adult stromal cells (bone marrow, adipose and periosteum derived) that have been used and compare their properties. Finally, we discuss the remaining challenges that need to be addressed to significantly improve the healing of bone defects.

show abstract

Section: Bone Graft Substitutes: Optimization Of Implant Design Strumentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone regeneration strategies: Engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Пластика черепа имеет не столько косметическое значение, сколько терапевтическое -краниопластика улучшает неврологический статус в послеоперационном периоде, что было продемонстрировано во множестве работ [3,5,6,14,15]. Несмотря на то что технически операция довольно проста, существует риск осложнений, который, по данным литературы [16][17][18], может достигать 18-36,5%.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Technical features and complications of cranioplasty in patients after decompressive craniectomy in the acute period of subarachnoid hemorrhage

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Specific to cranioplasties are the physical strength of the material and its ability to enhance cosmesis (Aydin et al, 2011). There is no ‘gold standard’ in choice of synthetic cranioplasty material, with synthetic polymers including methacrylate (Cooper, Schechter, Jacobs, Rubin, & Wille, 1977; Findler, Sela, & Sahar, 1979), PEEK (Ng & Nawaz, 2014; O’Reilly et al, 2015), in addition to metals (Hill, Luoma, Wilson, & Kitchen, 2012; Stoodley, Abbott, & Simpson, 1996) and ceramics (Kobayashi, Hara, Okudera, Takemae, & Sugita, 1987; Miyake, Ohta, & Tanaka, 2000) being used. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages (Cabraja, Klein, & Lehmann, 2009; Jaberi, Gambrell, Tiwana, Madden, & Finn, 2013; Moreira-Gonzalez, Jackson, Miyawaki, Barakat, & DiNick, 2003; Rosenthal et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PEEK is structurally similar to native bone and is already widely used in neurosurgical and craniofacial procedures. In addition, it is lightweight, radiolucent and can be sterilized repeatedly (Aydin et al, 2011; Ng & Nawaz, 2014; O’Reilly et al, 2015). Currently, clinical use of this technology entails recruitment of off-site third parties, potentially creating confidentiality, geographical and time constraint issues for the clinician.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of clinician-facilitated 3D printing of synthetic cranioplasty flaps

Panesar

Belo

D'Souza

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives3D scanning and stereolithographic printing technology becoming increasingly common, however its implementation into clinical practice is in its primacy. These technologies may be esoteric to the practicing neurosurgeon. We explored a range of 3D scanning and stereolithographic techniques to create patient-specific synthetic implants.MethodsWe simulated bilateral craniectomies from a single cadaveric specimen to create 3 methods of creating stereolithographically-viable virtual models. Firstly, we used ‘pre-and-post operative’ CT derived bony windows to create a virtual skull model, from which the flap was extracted. Secondly, we used an entry-level 3D light-scanner to scan and render models of the individual bone pieces. Thirdly, we used an arm-mounted, 3D laser-scanner to create virtual models using a real-time approach.ResultsFlaps were printed from the CT scanner and laser scanner models only, in a UV-cured polymer. The light scanner did not produce suitable virtual models for printing. The CT scanner derived models required extensive post-fabrication modification to fit the existing defects. The laser-scanner models assumed good fit within the defects without any modification.ConclusionsThe methods presented varying levels of complexity in acquisition and model rendering. Each technique required hardware at varying in price points from $0 to ∼$100,000. The laser-scanner models produced the best quality parts which bore near-perfect fit with the original defects. We discuss potential neurosurgical applications of this technology.

show abstract

Computer-Designed PEEK Implants

Cited by 58 publications

References 11 publications

Bone regeneration strategies: Engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives

Bone regeneration strategies: Engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives

Technical features and complications of cranioplasty in patients after decompressive craniectomy in the acute period of subarachnoid hemorrhage

Feasibility of clinician-facilitated 3D printing of synthetic cranioplasty flaps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About