Peripheral Vertebral Body Spacer With Depth-Controlled Insertion Tool
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current vertebral implants face challenges in precise placement between dense cortical bone regions and ensuring bone-growth inducing material contacts both vertebrae, leading to fusion failures due to improper positioning and insertion methods that can damage spinal structures and result in subsidence or inadequate bone growth.
Innovation Solution
An intervertebral stabilization implant with an interlockable cavity and an insertion tool allowing precise placement between posterior peripheral cortical bone regions, enabling post-insertion packing of bone-growth inducing material and preventing over-insertion, using an interlockable positioning head and adjustable depth control to ensure accurate positioning and contact with both vertebrae.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If the surgeon uses existing insertion methods (gripping with forceps or sliding from top and bottom), then the implant can be inserted into the disc space, but the implant cannot be precisely placed between the dense cortical bone regions and may require damaging tapping
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces a specialized insertion tool as an intermediary device that engages with the implant's circumferential engagement features. This tool provides precise control during insertion, allowing the implant to be accurately positioned between cortical bone regions without requiring damaging tapping or forceful manipulation.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant is designed with pre-formed circumferential engagement features (such as grooves or ridges) that anticipate the need for controlled insertion. These features are prepared in advance to interface with the insertion tool, enabling precise placement before the actual insertion operation occurs.
2Reliability
If the surgeon taps the implant further into the disc space to ensure proper seating, then the implant may be fully inserted, but the significant loads from tapping may cause cracking and over-insertion may damage the spinal cord
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces the traditional mechanical tapping method with a controlled insertion system. The specialized tool provides precise depth control and incremental insertion, substituting the high-impact mechanical tapping process with a controlled, low-stress insertion mechanism that eliminates cracking risks and spinal cord damage potential.
Solution Approach 2:
The insertion tool incorporates depth control mechanisms that provide feedback to the surgeon during insertion. This allows real-time monitoring of implant position, ensuring proper seating without over-insertion, and enabling corrective adjustments before damaging forces are applied.
3Ease of operation
If the implant is placed in the center of the disc space, then the insertion is easier and safer, but the implant subsides because the center is composed of softer cancellous bone
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies the principle of local quality by enabling different regions of the disc space to be utilized for different purposes. The controlled insertion system allows the implant to be positioned in the optimal location (between cortical bone regions for stability) rather than being constrained to the center (easier insertion but softer bone). The local structural characteristics of the disc space are matched to the implant placement strategy.
4Ease of manufacture
If the surgeon packs bone-growth inducing material into containers before insertion, then the implant is prepared, but the material frequently settles or subsides and fails to make contact with both vertebrae
Solution Approach 1:
The patent reverses the traditional sequence by performing the bone-growth material packing action after insertion rather than before. The implant is first inserted into the final position using the controlled insertion system, then the bone-growth material is packed into the implant's internal cavities. This preliminary positioning ensures that subsequent material packing will maintain contact with both vertebrae.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent inverts the conventional sequence of operations: instead of packing bone-growth material before insertion (traditional method), the material is packed after the implant is inserted into its final position. This reversal eliminates the settling problem because the implant is already in its final, stable position when the material is introduced.
5Device complexity
If the implant completely circumscribes the bone-growth inducing material containers, then the implant structure is simplified, but the surgeon has no way of knowing if the material has made contact with each vertebra
Solution Approach 1:
The patent incorporates visual indicators (such as color-coded markers or radiopaque elements) within the implant structure that change or become visible to indicate whether bone-growth material has properly contacted both vertebrae. These indicators provide immediate visual feedback to the surgeon without requiring complex additional structures.
Solution Approach 2:
The implant includes built-in feedback mechanisms such as visual indicators or radiopaque markers that provide information about material contact status. This feedback allows the surgeon to verify proper placement and contact without adding significant structural complexity to the implant design.
Data Source
AI summary
An intervertebral stabilization implant and an intervertebral stabilizer insertion tool are disclosed. The insertion tool inserts the implant between the posterior peripheral regions of two vertebral bodies, and has elements allowing the insertion tool to position the implant and remove the implant if necessary. The insertion tool engages interior surfaces of an interlockable implant cavity to reduce the amount of space necessary to position the implant.