Hammertoe Implant Spring Arms for Stable Osteopenic Bone Fixation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing hammertoe implants often fail to provide stable fixation in osteopenic bones due to tri-axial stress states, particularly when the dorsal-plantar loading vector is misaligned with the spring arm force, and are difficult to remove during revision surgeries.

Innovation Solution

The orthopedic implant design features a proximal segment with three spring arms forming an anchored barb and varying threading diameters for enhanced fixation, along with a distal segment threaded into the middle phalanx, and includes markings for optimal depth guidance. The implant is made of materials like PEEK for durability and includes drive features for easy removal.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional spring arm implants are used in osteopenic bones, then the implant can be inserted, but the fixation stability is insufficient due to tri-axial stress states

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefixation stabilityVSAvoidresistance to tri-axial stresses

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The implant is divided into multiple spring arms (at least three) that can independently engage with the bone, allowing each arm to resist forces from different directions. This segmentation enables the implant to handle tri-axial stress states more effectively than a single monolithic structure.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The threading parameters (minor and major diameters) are specifically optimized for engagement with osteopenic bone, with the major diameter designed to engage with cortical bone and the minor diameter to engage with cancellous bone. This local quality optimization provides enhanced fixation stability in compromised bone structures.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If the dorsal-plantar loading vector is misaligned with the spring arm force, then the implant structure remains simple, but the fixation reliability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefixation reliabilityVSAvoidalignment complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If the implant is made with secure fixation features, then the implantation stability is improved, but the removal difficulty increases during revision surgery

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveimplantation stabilityVSAvoidremoval ease

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The implant incorporates a dynamic removal mechanism where a removal tool can be inserted into the proximal segment and rotated to generate axial force for extraction. This dynamic interaction between the implant and removal tool allows secure fixation during implantation while enabling controlled removal during revision surgery.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS12383318B2Orthopedic implant and methods of implanting and removing same

Publication Date: 2025.08.12 RESTORE SURGICAL LLC DBA INSTRATEK

AI summary

Illustrative embodiments of orthopedic implants and methods for surgically repairing hammertoe are disclosed. According to at least one illustrative embodiment, an orthopedic implant includes a proximal segment comprising a number of spring arms forming an anchored barb at a first end of the implant, a distal segment extending between the proximal segment and a second end of the implant, and a central segment disposed between the proximal and distal segment.