Spinal Implant Self-Deploying Anchors Bone Damage
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Traditional spinal implants face challenges such as improper seating, subsidence, damage to critical bone structures, and expulsion issues during and after implantation, due to inadequate end-plate preparation, materials, and biomechanical integrity, among others.
Innovation Solution
The development of interbody spinal implants with self-deploying anchors that expand at body temperature, providing improved seating and resistance to expulsion, and featuring a roughened surface topography for enhanced biomechanical integration and stability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional spinal implants are used, then implantation can be performed, but the implants cause damage to critical bone structures and exhibit improper seating
Solution Approach 1:
The implant is divided into distinct functional components: a body portion for initial implantation and anchor engagement, and separate anchor portions that deploy independently. This segmentation allows the main body to be inserted without sharp edges while the anchors subsequently engage the bone, separating the implantation process from the anchoring function to prevent bone damage during insertion.
Solution Approach 2:
The anchors are prepared in a retracted or compressed state before implantation, allowing the implant body to be inserted first without the anchors interfering with surrounding bone structures. Once the implant is properly positioned, the anchors are then deployed to engage the bone, ensuring proper seating before anchoring occurs.
2Reliability
If traditional spinal implants are used, then implantation can be performed, but the implants experience subsidence into cancellous bone
Solution Approach 1:
The implant features localized anchor portions with different mechanical properties than the main body. These anchors are specifically designed with bone-engaging surfaces and geometries optimized for penetrating and anchoring into the cancellous bone, while the main body maintains smooth surfaces for soft tissue compatibility. This local differentiation provides targeted resistance to subsidence at the bone-implant interface.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant utilizes composite construction combining a biocompatible body material with anchor materials optimized for bone engagement. The anchors may incorporate surface treatments, coatings, or material compositions that enhance friction and mechanical interlocking with cancellous bone, providing superior resistance to subsidence while maintaining overall implant biomechanical integrity.
3Reliability
If traditional spinal implants are used, then implantation can be performed, but the implants are expelled due to biological loading
Solution Approach 1:
The anchor deployment mechanism operates autonomously after implantation, utilizing the implantation process itself or inherent material properties to trigger anchor expansion. The anchors self-deploy to their engaged configuration without requiring additional surgical steps or external actuation, providing resistance to expulsion through automatic engagement with the bone structure.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant transitions from a static, compact configuration during insertion to a dynamic, expanded configuration after implantation. The anchors are designed to change shape or extend from a retracted state during implantation to an engaged state that resists expulsion, allowing the device to adapt its mechanical properties to the operational requirements of each phase.
4Reliability
If larger implants are used to prevent expulsion, then resistance to expulsion improves, but implantation difficulty increases
Solution Approach 1:
The anchor portions are nested within or integrated with the implant body in a compact configuration during storage and implantation. This nesting allows the implant to maintain a small, manageable size for easy insertion through surgical access paths. After implantation, the anchors deploy outward from the nested configuration to provide extensive bone engagement and resistance to expulsion, achieving both ease of implantation and reliable anchoring.
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
The self-deploying anchors allow for smaller, more easily implanted devices with improved resistance to expulsion and enhanced biomechanical integration, reducing subsidence and damage to bone structures, while the roughened surface topography promotes better osteointegration and stability.
Implementation Method 1
The self-deploying anchors may be formed from a temperature-sensitive metal alloy, for example, where the anchor is deployed when the implant is raised to or above the transformation temperature of the temperature-sensitive metal alloy (e.g., at or slightly below body temperature).
Implementation Method 2
The top surface, the bottom surface, or both surfaces of the implant include a roughened surface topography, without sharp teeth that risk damage to bone structures, adapted to grip bone through friction generated when the implant is placed between two vertebrae
Data Source
AI summary
A spinal implant having a top surface, a bottom surface, opposing lateral sides, and opposing anterior and posterior portions. At least one of the top surface and bottom surface has a roughened surface topography, without sharp teeth that risk damage to bone structures, adapted to grip bone through friction generated when the implant is placed between two vertebrae and to inhibit migration of the implant. At least one of the top surface and the bottom surface also includes at least one self-deploying anchor having an expulsion tab and a bone-engaging tip that causes the implant to resist expulsion once the expulsion tab is deployed.