Spinal fusion is a standard surgical treatment for patients suffering from low back pain attributed to disc degeneration. However, results are somewhat variable and unpredictable. With fusion the kinematic behaviour of the spine is altered. Fusion and/or stabilizing implants carrying considerable load and prevent rotation of the fused segments. Associated with these changes, a risk for accelerated disc degeneration at the adjacent levels to fusion has been demonstrated. However, there is yet no method to predict the effect of fusion surgery on the adjacent tissue levels, i.e. bone and disc. The aim of this study was to develop a coupled and patient-specific mechanoregulated model to predict disc generation and changes in bone density after spinal fusion and to validate the results relative to patient follow-up data. To do so, a multiscale disc mechanoregulation adaptation framework was developed and coupled with a previously developed bone remodelling algorithm. This made it possible to determine extra cellular matrix changes in the intervertebral disc and bone density changes simultaneously based on changes in loading due to fusion surgery. It was shown that for 10 cases the predicted change in bone density and degeneration grade conforms reasonable well to clinical follow-up data. This approach helps us to understand the effect of surgical intervention on the adjacent tissue remodelling. Thereby, providing the first insight for a spine surgeon as to which patient could potentially be treated successfully by spinal fusion and in which patient has a high risk for adjacent tissue changes.

Introduction: In developed countries, the age structure of the population is currently undergoing an upward shift, resulting a decrease in general bone quality and surgical durability. Over the past decade, oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been globally accepted as a minimally invasive surgical technique. There are several stabilization options available for OLIF cage fixation such as self-anchored stand-alone (SSA), lateral plate-screw (LPS), and bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) systems. The constructs’ stability are crucial for the immediate and long-term success of the surgery. The aim of this study is to investigate the biomechanical effect of the aforementioned constructs, using finite element analysis with different bone qualities (osteoporotic and normal).Method: A bi-segmental (L2–L4) finite element (FE) model was created, using a CT scan of a 24-year-old healthy male. After the FE model validation, CAD geometries of the implants were inserted into the L3–L4 motion segment during a virtual surgery. For the simulations, a 150 N follower load was applied on the models, then 10 Nm of torque was used in six general directions (flexion, extension, right/left bending, and right/left rotation), with different bone material properties.Results: The smallest segmental (L3–L4) ROM (range of motion) was observed in the BPS system, except for right bending. Osteoporosis increased ROMs in all constructs, especially in the LPS system (right bending increase: 140.26%). Osteoporosis also increased the caudal displacement of the implanted cage in all models (healthy bone: 0.06 ± 0.03 mm, osteoporosis: 0.106 ± 0.07 mm), particularly with right bending, where the displacement doubled in SSA and LPS constructs. The displacement of the screws inside the L4 vertebra increased by 59% on average (59.33 ± 21.53%) due to osteoporosis (100% in LPS, rotation). BPS-L4 screw displacements were the least affected by osteoporosis.Conclusions: The investigated constructs provide different levels of stability to the spine depending on the quality of the bone, which can affect the outcome of the surgery. In our model, the BPS system was found to be the most stable construct in osteoporosis. The presented model, after further development, has the potential to help the surgeon in planning a particular spinal surgery by adjusting the stabilization type to the patient’s bone quality.

The aim of the study is to develop a workflow to establish geometrical quality criteria for 3D printed anatomical models as a guidance for selecting the most suitable 3D printing technologies available in a clinical environment. We defined the 3D geometry of a 25-year-old male patient's L4 vertebra and the geometry was then printed using two technologies, which differ in printing resolution and affordability: Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) and Digital Light Processing (DLP). In order to measure geometrical accuracy, the 3D scans of two physical models were compared to the virtual input model. To compare surface qualities of these printing technologies we determined surface roughness for two regions of interest. Finally, we present our experience in the clinical application of a physical model in a congenital deformity case. The analysis of the distribution of the modified Hausdorff distance values along the vertebral surface meshes (99% of values <1 mm) of the 3D printed models provides evidence for high printing accuracy in both printing techniques. Our results demonstrate that the surface qualities, measured by roughness are adequate (~99% of values <0.1 mm) for both physical models. Finally, we implemented the FDM physical model for surgical planning. We present a workflow capable of determining the quality of 3D printed models and the application of a high quality and affordable 3D printed spine physical model in the pre operative planning. As a result of the visual guidance provided by the physical model, we were able to define the optimal trajectory of the screw insertion during surgery.

Purpose: The objective of this systematic review is to present a comprehensive summary of existing research on the use of 3D printing in spinal surgery. Methods: The researchers conducted a thorough search of four digital databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase) to identify relevant studies published between January 1999 and December 2022. The review focused on various aspects, including the types of objects printed, clinical applications, clinical outcomes, time and cost considerations, 3D printing materials, location of 3D printing, and technologies utilized. Out of the 1620 studies initially identified and the 17 added by manual search, 105 met the inclusion criteria for this review, collectively involving 2088 patients whose surgeries involved 3D printed objects. Results: The studies presented a variety of 3D printed devices, such as anatomical models, intraoperative navigational templates, and customized implants. The most widely used type of objects are drill guides (53%) and anatomical models (25%) which can also be used for simulating the surgery. Custom made implants are much less frequently used (16% of papers). These devices significantly improved clinical outcomes, particularly enhancing the accuracy of pedicle screw placement. Most studies (88%) reported reduced operation times, although two noted longer times due to procedural complexities. A variety of 3DP technologies and materials were used, with STL, FDM, and SLS common for models and guides, and titanium for implants via EBM, SLM, and DMLS. Materialise software (Mimics, 3-Matic, Magics) was frequently utilized. While most studies mentioned outsourced production, in-house printing was implied in several cases, indicating a trend towards localized 3D printing in spine surgery. Conclusions: 3D printing in spine surgery, a rapidly growing area of research, is predominantly used for creating drill guides for screw insertion, anatomical models, and innovative implants, enhancing clinical outcomes and reducing operative time. While cost-efficiency remains uncertain due to insufficient data, some 3D printing applications, like pedicle screw drill guides, are already widely accepted and routinely used in hospitals.