Burr Guide and Depth Stop for Low-Bone-Loss Implant Removal

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for removing and replacing ankle implants, particularly tibial implants, often require invasive bone removal, causing significant trauma and prolonged recovery due to the need to match the shape of the implant's profile, which results in excessive bone loss and discomfort.

Innovation Solution

The use of burrs with depth stops and burr guides that allow precise bone removal along specific paths, minimizing cortical bone removal by guiding the burr to mimic the implant's shape, thereby reducing the number of incisions and bone loss.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional methods are used to remove tibial implants, then the implant can be removed, but excessive bone removal is required causing significant trauma and prolonged recovery

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveimplant removal capabilityVSAvoidbone loss

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The burr guide is prepared in advance with pre-defined channels that correspond to the implant profile. These channels are designed beforehand to match the specific implant geometry, allowing the surgeon to follow predetermined paths that minimize bone removal while ensuring complete implant extraction.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The burr guide creates a negative impression or copy of the implant profile through its contact surface. This copied geometry is then used to define the bone removal paths, ensuring that only the necessary amount of bone is removed to match the implant shape without excessive trauma.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If more bone is removed to ensure complete implant removal, then the implant can be fully extracted, but patient trauma and recovery time increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveimplant extraction completenessVSAvoidpatient trauma

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The burr guide provides different guidance paths for different regions around the implant. Each channel in the guide corresponds to a specific location and removes bone only where necessary, creating locally optimized removal paths that ensure complete implant extraction while minimizing trauma to surrounding healthy bone tissue.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If the burr is inserted deeper to remove all bone around the implant, then complete implant removal is achieved, but cortical bone integrity is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveimplant removal completenessVSAvoidcortical bone integrity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The depth stop is configured in advance to prevent the burr from penetrating too deeply into the bone. This pre-set depth limitation ensures that the burr removes only the necessary bone around the implant while preserving the integrity of the cortical bone layer, avoiding unnecessary trauma and complications.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach facilitates less invasive implant removal and preparation for new implants, reducing patient trauma, discomfort, and recovery time by allowing targeted bone removal while preserving cortical bone integrity.

Implementation Method 1

The depth stop is configured to contact tissue of a patient or a burr guide to restrict a depth of insertion of the elongated shaft

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectMechanical constraint:

Implementation Method 2

The first guide channel is configured to guide the burr as the burr is swept along a path, the path corresponding to a portion of bone to be removed

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectMechanical guidance:

Implementation Method 3

The elongated shaft has at least one cutting edge

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectMechanical cutting:

Implementation Method 4

sweeping the burr along a first path adjacent to the surface of the implant to remove bone adjacent to the implant

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectAbrasion: Abrasion

Data Source

PatentUS12582414B2Devices and methods for removing bone

Publication Date: 2026.03.24 WRIGHT MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY INC

AI summary

A system or kit includes a rotating tool and a guide. The rotating tool includes an elongated shaft with at least one cutting edge. The rotating tool is configured to remove bone from a patient. The guide includes a body comprising a contact surface and a guide channel. The contact surface is configured to position the guide relative to a patient or an implant. The guide channel is configured to receive the elongated shaft and to allow the cutting edge to be swept along a path. The path corresponds to a portion of the bone to be removed. A method of removing an implant includes forming an incision in a patient. The method further includes inserting a rotating tool into the incision such that a cutting edge of the rotating tool is adjacent to a surface of the implant. The method further includes sweeping the cutting edge along a first path adjacent to the surface of the implant to remove bone adjacent to the implant.