Custom Bone Implants With 3D Bone Modeling for Cortical Contact

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current hip replacement surgeries rely on mass-produced, non-custom implants with poor cortical contact, requiring manual bone preparation and limited automation in generating high-fidelity anatomical models, leading to suboptimal fixation and performance.

Innovation Solution

A system and method for generating custom bone implants using 3D digital models of patient-specific bones, with a processor transforming scan data into 3D models that include cortical bone boundaries, enabling improved cortical contact and automated bone excavation protocols for precise implant placement.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If standard mass-produced implants are used, then manufacturing cost and complexity are reduced, but cortical contact and fixation quality deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoidcortical contact quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The implant design transitions from uniform standard geometry to patient-specific customized geometry that matches the individual cortical bone structure. The cortical contact surface is locally adapted to the patient's anatomy, ensuring optimal contact in critical regions while maintaining manufacturability through automated customization processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The implant parameters (dimensions, curvature, surface geometry) are changed from fixed standard values to customized values derived from patient-specific 3D bone models. This allows optimization of cortical contact parameters without fundamentally changing the manufacturing approach, as automated manufacturing systems can accommodate parameter variations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Device complexity

If manual bone preparation is used, then equipment complexity and cost are reduced, but preparation time and surgical complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveequipment simplicityVSAvoidsurgical preparation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Manual mechanical bone preparation using broaches and reamers is replaced with an automated computer-controlled bone preparation system. The system uses pre-planned preparation paths and parameters derived from 3D bone models to guide automated tools, reducing surgical time while managing equipment complexity through software integration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

Bone preparation parameters, tool paths, and implant positioning are predetermined through virtual planning using 3D bone models before surgery. This preliminary digital preparation allows the actual surgical preparation to be executed more quickly and precisely by following pre-calculated instructions, reducing intraoperative time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If automated bone mapping is implemented, then segmentation time and labor are reduced, but system complexity and computational requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesegmentation speedVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Complex automated bone segmentation and mapping functions are implemented as software intermediaries between the imaging system and the manufacturing/surgical planning system. The software layer handles the computational complexity of automated segmentation, providing simplified interfaces and pre-processed 3D bone models to users while managing the underlying system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If custom implants are manufactured, then cortical contact and fixation are improved, but manufacturing time and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefixation qualityVSAvoidmanufacturing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patient-specific bone geometry is copied into a 3D digital model, which then serves as the template for generating the custom implant design. This digital copying and modeling approach allows rapid iteration and optimization of implant geometry without repeated physical prototyping, reducing overall manufacturing time while maintaining customization benefits.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentUS11839548B2Apparatus, method and system for providing customizable bone implants
Publication Date: 2023.12.12 MT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
  • US11839548B2 patent drawing
  • US11839548B2 patent drawing
  • US11839548B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The present invention includes a method for generating a three-dimensional model of a bone. The method may further include generating a cut plan for excavating a portion of the bone according to the cut plan to allow the insertion of a custom implant. In a particular arrangement, the method may includes excavating the bone with an autonomous extremity excavator utilizing the cut plan generated by a processor. In a further arrangement, the method may include generating a digital model of a custom implant and generating, using the digital model, a physical model sharing the same dimensions as the digital module using manufacturing device.