• Eur Spine J · Jul 2023

    Comment

    Novel 3D printable PEEK-HA-Mg2SiO4 composite material for spine implants: biocompatibility and imaging compatibility assessments.

    • Naresh Kumar, Alathur RamakrishnanSridharanSDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Level 11 Tower Block, 1E, Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore., Keith Gerard Lopez, Niyou Wang, Balamurugan A Vellayappan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Hallinan, FuhJerry Ying HsiJYHDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, #04-18 Block EA, 9 Engineering Drive 1, Singapore, 117575, Singapore., and A Senthil Kumar.
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Level 11 Tower Block, 1E, Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228, Singapore. dosksn@nus.edu.sg.
    • Eur Spine J. 2023 Jul 1; 32 (7): 225522652255-2265.

    PurposeTo develop a novel 3D printable polyether ether ketone (PEEK)-hydroxyapatite (HA)-magnesium orthosilicate (Mg2SiO4) composite material with enhanced properties for potential use in tumour, osteoporosis and other spinal conditions. We aim to evaluate biocompatibility and imaging compatibility of the material.MethodsMaterials were prepared in three different compositions, namely composite A: 75 weight % PEEK, 20 weight % HA, 5 weight % Mg2SiO4; composite B: 70 weight% PEEK, 25 weight % HA, 5 weight % Mg2SiO4; and composite C: 65 weight % PEEK, 30 weight % HA, 5 weight % Mg2SiO4. The materials were processed to obtain 3D printable filament. Biomechanical properties were analysed as per ASTM standards and biocompatibility of the novel material was evaluated using indirect and direct cell cytotoxicity tests. Cell viability of the novel material was compared to PEEK and PEEK-HA materials. The novel material was used to 3D print a standard spine cage. Furthermore, the CT and MR imaging compatibility of the novel material cage vs PEEK and PEEK-HA cages were evaluated using a phantom setup.ResultsComposite A resulted in optimal material processing to obtain a 3D printable filament, while composite B and C resulted in non-optimal processing. Composite A enhanced cell viability up to ~ 20% compared to PEEK and PEEK-HA materials. Composite A cage generated minimal/no artefacts on CT and MR imaging and the images were comparable to that of PEEK and PEEK-HA cages.ConclusionComposite A demonstrated superior bioactivity vs PEEK and PEEK-HA materials and comparable imaging compatibility vs PEEK and PEEK-HA. Therefore, our material displays an excellent potential to manufacture spine implants with enhanced mechanical and bioactive property.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…