Evaluation of stiffness-matched, 3D-printed, NiTi mandibular graft fixation in an ovine model.
Additive manufacturing
Nickel–titanium
Sheep model
Stress shielding/stress concentration
Virtual surgical planning
Journal
Biomedical engineering online
ISSN: 1475-925X
Titre abrégé: Biomed Eng Online
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Oct 2024
26 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
10
06
2024
accepted:
03
09
2024
medline:
26
10
2024
pubmed:
26
10
2024
entrez:
25
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Manually bent, standard-of-care, Ti-6Al-4V, mandibular graft fixation devices are associated with a significant post-operative failure rate. These failures require the patient to endure stressful and expensive re-operation. The approach recommended in this report demonstrates the optimization of graft fixation device mechanical properties via "stiffness-matching" by varying the fixation device's location, shape, and material composition through simulation of the device's post-operative performance. This provides information during pre-operative planning that may avoid future device failure. Optimized performance may combine translation of all loading into compression of the bone graft with the adjacent bone segments and elimination or minimization of post-healing interruption of normal stress-strain (loading) trajectories. This study reports a sheep mandibular graft model where four animals received virtually optimized, experimental nickel-titanium (NiTi) fixation plates fabricated using laser beam powder bed fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing (AM). The last animal, our control, received a standard-of-care, manually bent, Ti-6Al-4V (aka Ti64) fixation plate. A 17.5-mm mandibular graft healed completely in all four animals receiving the experimental device. Experimental NiTi-implanted sheep experienced mandibular bone healing and restoration. The Ti64 plate, in the control animal, fractured and dislocated shortly after being implanted. The use of stiffness-matched implants, by means of plate material (NiTi) and geometry (porosity) enhanced bone healing and promoted better load transfer to the healed bone when compared to the bulk Ti64 found in the fixation plate that the Control animal received. The design technique and screw orientation and depth planning improved throughout the study leading to more rapid healing. The large animal model reported here provides data useful for a follow-on clinical trial.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Manually bent, standard-of-care, Ti-6Al-4V, mandibular graft fixation devices are associated with a significant post-operative failure rate. These failures require the patient to endure stressful and expensive re-operation. The approach recommended in this report demonstrates the optimization of graft fixation device mechanical properties via "stiffness-matching" by varying the fixation device's location, shape, and material composition through simulation of the device's post-operative performance. This provides information during pre-operative planning that may avoid future device failure. Optimized performance may combine translation of all loading into compression of the bone graft with the adjacent bone segments and elimination or minimization of post-healing interruption of normal stress-strain (loading) trajectories.
RESULTS
RESULTS
This study reports a sheep mandibular graft model where four animals received virtually optimized, experimental nickel-titanium (NiTi) fixation plates fabricated using laser beam powder bed fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing (AM). The last animal, our control, received a standard-of-care, manually bent, Ti-6Al-4V (aka Ti64) fixation plate. A 17.5-mm mandibular graft healed completely in all four animals receiving the experimental device. Experimental NiTi-implanted sheep experienced mandibular bone healing and restoration. The Ti64 plate, in the control animal, fractured and dislocated shortly after being implanted.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The use of stiffness-matched implants, by means of plate material (NiTi) and geometry (porosity) enhanced bone healing and promoted better load transfer to the healed bone when compared to the bulk Ti64 found in the fixation plate that the Control animal received. The design technique and screw orientation and depth planning improved throughout the study leading to more rapid healing. The large animal model reported here provides data useful for a follow-on clinical trial.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39456000
doi: 10.1186/s12938-024-01289-x
pii: 10.1186/s12938-024-01289-x
doi:
Substances chimiques
Titanium
D1JT611TNE
titanium nickelide
12035-60-8
Alloys
0
Nickel
7OV03QG267
Types de publication
Journal Article
Evaluation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Zhang M, Gregory T, Hansen U, Cheng C. Effect of stress-shielding-induced bone resorption on glenoid loosening in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Res. 2020;38(7):1566–74.
doi: 10.1002/jor.24711
Eidel B, Gote A, Fritzen CP, Ohrndorf A, Christ HJ. Tibial implant fixation in TKA worth a revision?—how to avoid stress-shielding even for stiff metallic implants. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 2021;24(3):320–32.
doi: 10.1080/10255842.2020.1830274
Spencer KR, Sizeland A, Taylor GI, Wiesenfeld D. The use of titanium mandibular reconstruction plates in patients with oral cancer. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999;28(4):288–90.
doi: 10.1016/S0901-5027(99)80160-X
Wei FC, Celik N, Yang WG, Chen IH, Chang YM, Chen HC. Complications after reconstruction by plate and soft-tissue free flap in composite mandibular defects and secondary salvage reconstruction with osteocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;112(1):37–42.
doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000065911.00623.BD
Habijan T, Haberland C, Meier H, Frenzel J, Wittsiepe J, Wuwer C, et al. The biocompatibility of dense and porous nickel–titanium produced by selective laser melting. Mater Sci Eng C. 2013;33(1):419–26.
doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2012.09.008
van der Rijt EEM, Noorlag R, Koole R, Abbink JH, Rosenberg AJWP. Predictive factors for premature loss of Martin 2.7 mandibular reconstruction plates. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(2):121–5.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.10.010
Lindqvist C, Söderholm AL, Laine P, Paatsama J. Rigid reconstruction plates for immediate reconstruction following mandibular resection for malignant tumors. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;50(11):1158–63.
doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(92)90146-Q
Maurer P, Eckert AW, Kriwalsky MS, Schubert J. Scope and limitations of methods of mandibular reconstruction: a long-term follow-up. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;48(2):100–4.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.07.005
Paré A, Bossard A, Laure B, Weiss P, Gauthier O, Corre P. Reconstruction of segmental mandibular defects: current procedures and perspectives. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2019;4(6):587–96.
doi: 10.1002/lio2.325
Martola M, Lindqvist C, Hänninen H, Al-Sukhun J. Fracture of titanium plates used for mandibular reconstruction following ablative tumor surgery. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007;80B(2):345–52.
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.30603
Kimura A, Nagasao T, Kaneko T, Tamaki T, Miyamoto J, Nakajima T. Adequate fixation of plates for stability during mandibular reconstruction. J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2006;34(4):193–200.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2006.01.003
Farber SJ, Snyder-Warwick AK, Skolnick GB, Woo AS, Patel KB. Maxillomandibular fixation by plastic surgeons. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;77(3):305–7.
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000592
Liu SP, Cai ZG, Zhang J, Zhang JG, Zhang Y. Stability and complications of miniplates for mandibular reconstruction with a fibular graft: outcomes for 544 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54(5):496–500.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.08.259
Ahmad M, Nanda R, Bajwa AS, Candal-Couto J, Green S, Hui AC. Biomechanical testing of the locking compression plate: when does the distance between bone and implant significantly reduce construct stability? Injury. 2007;38(3):358–64.
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.08.058
Vazquez-Armendariz J, Olivas-Alanis LH, Mahan T, Rodriguez CA, Groeber M, Niezgoda S, et al. Workflow for robotic point-of-care manufacturing of personalized maxillofacial graft fixation hardware. Integr Mater Manuf Innov. 2023;12(2):92–104.
doi: 10.1007/s40192-023-00298-3
ASTM. F382-17 standard specification and test method for metallic bone plates. 2023.
Schell H, Duda GN, Peters A, Tsitsilonis S, Johnson KA, Schmidt-Bleek K. The haematoma and its role in bone healing. J Exp Orthop. 2017;4(1):5.
doi: 10.1186/s40634-017-0079-3
Nagasao T, Miyamoto J, Kawana H. Biomechanical evaluation of implant placement in the reconstructed mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(6):999–1005.
Shayesteh Moghaddam N, Taheri Andani M, Amerinatanzi A, Haberland C, Huff S, Miller M, et al. Metals for bone implants: safety, design, and efficacy. Biomanuf Rev. 2016;1(1):1.
doi: 10.1007/s40898-016-0001-2
Yang C, Abanteriba S, Becker A. A review of shape memory alloy based filtration devices. AIP Adv. 2020;10(6): 060701.
doi: 10.1063/1.5133981
Ibrahim H, Jahadakbar A, Dehghan A, Moghaddam N, Amerinatanzi A, Elahinia M. In vitro corrosion assessment of additively manufactured porous NiTi structures for bone fixation applications. Metals. 2018;8(3):164.
doi: 10.3390/met8030164
Farber E, Zhu JN, Popovich A, Popovich V. A review of NiTi shape memory alloy as a smart material produced by additive manufacturing. Mater Today Proc. 2020;30:761–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.563
Naujokat H, Gökkaya AI, Açil Y, Loger K, Klüter T, Fuchs S, et al. In vivo biocompatibility evaluation of 3D-printed nickel–titanium fabricated by selective laser melting. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2022;33(2):13.
doi: 10.1007/s10856-022-06641-y
Pilliar RM, Cameron HU, Binnington AG, Szivek J, Macnab I. Bone ingrowth and stress shielding with a porous surface coated fracture fixation plate. J Biomed Mater Res. 1979;13(5):799–810.
doi: 10.1002/jbm.820130510
Chmielewska A, Dean D. The role of stiffness-matching in the design of metallic skeletal reconstruction devices—a review. Bethesda: Acta Materalia, Inc.; 2023.
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4484337
Gallego L, Pérez-Basterrechea M, García-Consuegra L, Álvarez-Viejo M, Megías J, Novoa A, et al. Repair of segmental mandibular bone defects in sheep using bone marrow stromal cells and autologous serum scaffold: a pilot study. J Clin Periodontol. 2015;42(12):1143–51.
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12480
Watson E, Pearce HA, Hogan KJ, van Dijk NWM, Smoak MM, Barrios S, et al. Repair of complex ovine segmental mandibulectomy utilizing customized tissue engineered bony flaps. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(2): e0280481.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280481
Araújo MM, Lauria A, Mendes MBM, Claro APRA, Claro CADA, Moreira RWF. Analysis of residual stress and hardness in regions of pre-manufactured and manual bends in fixation plates for maxillary advancement. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;19(4):369–73.
doi: 10.1007/s10006-015-0504-7
Wan B, Yoda N, Zheng K, Zhang Z, Wu C, Clark JR, et al. On effect of residual stress on fracture behavior of mandibular reconstruction plates. Eng Fract Mech. 2024;305: 110158.
doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2024.110158
Li Y, Li Z, Tian L, Li D, Lu B, Shi C, et al. Clinical application of 3D-printed PEEK implants for repairing mandibular defects. J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2022;50(8):621–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2022.06.002
Suresh V, Anolik R, Powers D. The utility of polyether-ether-ketone implants adjacent to sinus cavities after craniofacial trauma. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(11):2361–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2018.05.002
Moghaddam NS, Skoracki R, Miller M, Elahinia M, Dean D. Three dimensional printing of stiffness-tuned, nitinol skeletal fixation hardware with an example of mandibular segmental defect repair. Procedia CIRP. 2016;49:45–50.
doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2015.07.027
Olivas-Alanis LH. Implementation of advanced design and additive manufacturing techniques for the development of medically relevant devices. [Monterrey]: Tecnologico de Monterrey; 2023.
Sun Z, Rafferty KL, Egbert MA, Herring SW. Mandibular mechanics after osteotomy and distraction appliance placement I: postoperative mobility of the osteotomy site. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64(4):610–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2005.12.008
Wan B, Yoda N, Zheng K, Zhang Z, Wu C, Clark J, et al. On interaction between fatigue of reconstruction plate and time-dependent bone remodeling. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2022;136: 105483.
doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2022.105483
Tadich T, Tarazona AM. Replacement, reduction and refinement: ethical considerations in the current applications of the 3Rs. 2023. p. 667–83.
Snihirova D, Höche D, Lamaka S, Mir Z, Hack T, Zheludkevich ML. Galvanic corrosion of Ti6Al4V-AA2024 joints in aircraft environment: modelling and experimental validation. Corros Sci. 2019;157:70–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.corsci.2019.04.036
Figueira N, Silva TM, Carmezim MJ, Fernandes JCS. Corrosion behaviour of NiTi alloy. Electrochim Acta. 2009;54(3):921–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2008.08.001
Bansiddhi A, Sargeant TD, Stupp SI, Dunand DC. Porous NiTi for bone implants: a review. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(4):773–82.
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2008.02.009
Bocchetta P, Chen LY, Tardelli JDC, dos Reis AC, Almeraya-Calderón F, Leo P. Passive layers and corrosion resistance of biomedical Ti-6Al-4V and β-Ti alloys. Coatings. 2021;11(5):487.
doi: 10.3390/coatings11050487
Keaveny TM, Clarke BL, Cosman F, Orwoll ES, Siris ES, Khosla S, et al. Biomechanical computed tomography analysis (BCT) for clinical assessment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2020;31(6):1025–48.
doi: 10.1007/s00198-020-05384-2
Claes L, Augat P, Suger G, Wilke HJ. Influence of size and stability of the osteotomy gap on the success of fracture healing. J Orthop Res. 1997;15(4):577–84.
doi: 10.1002/jor.1100150414
Korioth TWP, Romilly DP, Hannam AG. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of the dentate human mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1992;88(1):69–96.
doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330880107
Ma Z, Qiang Z, Zhao H, Piao H, Ren L. Mechanical properties of cortical bones related to temperature and orientation of Haversian canals. Mater Res Express. 2020;7(1): 015408.
doi: 10.1088/2053-1591/ab6899
Mirzaali MJ, Schwiedrzik JJ, Thaiwichai S, Best JP, Michler J, Zysset PK, et al. Mechanical properties of cortical bone and their relationships with age, gender, composition and microindentation properties in the elderly. Bone. 2016;93:196–211.
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2015.11.018
Martini L, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Giardino R. Sheep model in orthopedic research: a literature review. Comp Med. 2001;51(4):292–9.
Ravaglioli A, Krajewski A, Celotti GC, Piancastelli A, Bacchini B, Montanari L, et al. Mineral evolution of bone. Biomaterials. 1996;17(6):617–22.
doi: 10.1016/0142-9612(96)88712-6
den Boer FC, Patka P, Bakker FC, Wippermann BW, van Lingen A, Vink GQM, et al. New segmental long bone defect model in sheep: quantitative analysis of healing with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. J Orthop Res. 1999;17(5):654–60.
doi: 10.1002/jor.1100170506
Schouman T, Schmitt M, Adam C, Dubois G, Rouch P. Influence of the overall stiffness of a load-bearing porous titanium implant on bone ingrowth in critical-size mandibular bone defects in sheep. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;59:484–96.
doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.02.036
Abu-Serriah M, Kontaxis A, Ayoub A, Harrison J, Odell E, Barbenel J. Mechanical evaluation of mandibular defects reconstructed using osteogenic protein-1 (rhOP-1) in a sheep model: a critical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;34(3):287–93.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2004.09.008
Tatara AM, Koons GL, Watson E, Piepergerdes TC, Shah SR, Smith BT, et al. Biomaterials-aided mandibular reconstruction using in vivo bioreactors. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2019;116(14):6954–63.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1819246116
Jahadakbar A, Shayesteh Moghaddam N, Amerinatanzi A, Dean D, Karaca H, Elahinia M. Finite element simulation and additive manufacturing of stiffness-matched NiTi fixation hardware for mandibular reconstruction surgery. Bioengineering. 2016;3(4):36.
doi: 10.3390/bioengineering3040036
Chmielewska A, Jahadakbar A, Wysocki B, Elahinia M, Święszkowski W, Dean D. Chemical polishing of additively manufactured, porous, nickel–titanium skeletal fixation plates. Print Addit Manuf. 2021;9(4):269–77.