Expandable Intervertebral Fusion Implant for Endoscopic Spinal Surgery
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current intervertebral fusion implants face challenges in achieving adequate stability and size adaptation within the varying disc space heights and shapes, often requiring excessive retraction of neural or vascular elements, leading to complications such as vascular tears or neural damage, due to their limited expandability and inability to be deployed minimally invasively through an endoscope.
Innovation Solution
An expandable intervertebral fusion implant with internal arcuate arms for unidirectional vertical expansion and telescopic cross-members for lateral expansion, allowing for deployment through an endoscope or minimally invasive techniques, providing adjustable dimensions to fit the disc space effectively and stabilize adjacent vertebrae.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If traditional intervertebral fusion implants are used, then the implant can provide structural support, but the implant cannot be deployed minimally invasively through an endoscope and requires excessive retraction of neural or vascular elements
Solution Approach 1:
The implant is designed in a collapsed, nested configuration that fits within the narrow working channel of an endoscope for minimally invasive delivery. After deployment in the disc space, the implant expands from its compact delivery state to its functional size, eliminating the need for excessive retraction of neural or vascular elements.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant transitions from a static, fixed-size design to a dynamic, expandable structure that can change dimensions after deployment. This dynamic capability allows the implant to be delivered in a compact state through an endoscope and then expanded to provide adequate structural support without requiring excessive retraction of surrounding tissues.
2Adaptability or versatility
If traditional fixed-size implants are used, then the implant structure is simple, but the implant cannot adapt to varying disc space heights and shapes
Solution Approach 1:
The implant incorporates expandable arcuate arms and telescopic cross-members that allow dynamic adjustment of the implant dimensions to match varying disc space heights and shapes. The arcuate arms can be expanded vertically to accommodate different disc space heights, while the telescopic cross-members allow lateral expansion to match disc space width, providing adaptability without requiring multiple fixed-size implant options.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant is divided into modular components including arcuate arms and telescopic cross-members that can be independently adjusted. This segmentation allows each component to be tuned to match the specific dimensions of the patient's disc space, providing customization and adaptability while maintaining a relatively simple overall structure.
3Adaptability or versatility
If the implant is made expandable with arcuate arms and telescopic cross-members, then the implant can adapt to disc space variations, but the implant mechanism becomes more complex
Solution Approach 1:
The expansion mechanism uses simple dynamic components such as telescopic cross-members that slide within each other and arcuate arms that pivot at joints. These dynamic elements provide dimensional adjustment capabilities through basic mechanical motions rather than complex actuation systems, maintaining relative simplicity while achieving adaptability.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant's expansion mechanism is designed to be self-contained and self-actuating through simple mechanical means. The telescopic cross-members and arcuate arms can be deployed and locked into position using straightforward mechanical interactions without requiring complex external actuation systems, reducing overall device complexity while maintaining adaptability.
Data Source
AI summary
An expandable intervertebral fusion implant, including an inferior component, including a first plurality of axial members and a first plurality of cross-members, a superior component, including a second plurality of axial members and a second plurality of cross-members, and at least one locking arm operatively arranged to lock the superior component at a distance from the inferior component.