The intact intervertebral disc is a six-freedom degree elastic deformation structure with shock absorption. "Ball-and-socket" TDR do not reproduce these properties inducing zygapophyseal joint overload. Elastomeric TDRs reproduce better normal disc kinematics, but repeated core deformation causes its degeneration. We aimed to create a new TDR (ADDISC) reproducing healthy disc features. We designed TDR, analyzed (Finite Element Analysis), and measured every 500,000 cycles for 10 million cycles of the flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation cyclic compression bench-testing. In the inlay case, we weighted it and measured its deformation. ADDISC has two semi-spherical articular surfaces, one rotation centre for flexion, another for extension, the third for lateral bending, and a polycarbonate urethane inlay providing shock absorption. The first contact is between PCU and metal surfaces. There is no metal-metal contact up to 2000 N, and CoCr28Mo6 absorbs the load. After 10 million cycles at 1.2-2.0 kN loads, wear 140.96 mg (35.50 mm³), but no implant failures. Our TDR has a physiological motion range due to its articular surfaces' shape and the PCU inlay bumpers, minimizing the facet joint overload. ADDISC mimics healthy disc biomechanics and Instantaneous Rotation Center, absorbs shock, reduces wear, and has excellent long-term endurance.

Unmodified Ti6Al4V can osseointegrate, but sometimes this capacity needs to be improved. This study aimed to see how much porosity improves osseointegration in a Ti6Al4V implant. Three types of Ti6Al4V cylindrical-shaped implants (13.00 mm length × 5.00 mm diameter) were evaluated: solid sandblasted acid-etched, sintered, and porous 3D-printed (681.00 µm average pore size). Fifteen 20-week-old nullipara female parasite-free New Zealand California white rabbits were used, employing the femoral condyle defect model and undertaking µ-CT analysis and pull-out testing eight weeks later. On µ-CT densitometric analysis, the solid sandblasted rod showed the highest new bone growth around the implant. Bone growth was higher inside the implants for the porous 3D-printed (54.00 ± 5.00 mm³) than for the sintered (1.00 ± 0.05 mm³) and zero for the sandblasted implants. In the pull-out test, there were no statistically significant differences in the ANOVA analysis between the sintered (900.00 N ± 310.00 N) and porous 3D-printed (700.00 N ± 220.00 N) implants. Such differences did exist between the sandblasted material (220.00 N ± 50.00 N) and the two other materials (sintered p 0.002, porous p 0.034). The porous 3D-printed and sintered implant pull-out strength were significantly better than that of the solid rod sandblasted implant. Still, there were no statistically significant differences between the first two.

Study design: Biomechanical study of a nucleus replacement with a finite element model. Objective: To validate a Bionate 80A ring-shaped nucleus replacement. Methods: The ANSYS lumbar spine model made from lumbar spine X-rays and magnetic resonance images obtained from cadaveric spine specimens were used. All materials were assumed homogeneous, isotropic, and linearly elastic. We studied three options: intact spine, nucleotomy, and nucleus implant. Two loading conditions were evaluated at L₃-L₄, L₄-L₅, and L₅-S₁ discs: a 1000 N axial compression load and this load after the addition of 8 Nm flexion moment in the sagittal plane plus 8 Nm axial rotation torque. Results: Maximum nucleus implant axial compression stresses in the range of 16–34 MPa and tensile stress in the range of 5–16 MPa, below Bionate 80A resistance were obtained. Therefore, there is little risk of permanent implant deformation or severe damage under normal loading conditions. Nucleotomy increased segment mobility, zygapophyseal joint and end plate pressures, and annulus stresses and strains. All these parameters were restored satisfactorily by nucleus replacement but never reached the intact status. In addition, annulus stresses and strains were lower with the nucleus implant than in the intact spine under axial compression and higher under complex loading conditions. Conclusions: Under normal loading conditions, there is a negligible risk of nucleus replacement, permanent deformation or severe damage. Nucleotomy increased segmental mobility, zygapophyseal joint pressures, and annulus stresses and strains. Nucleus replacement restored segmental mobility and zygapophyseal joint pressures close to the intact spine. End plate pressures were similar for the intact and nucleus implant conditions under both loading modes. Manufacturing customized nucleus implants is considered feasible, as satisfactory biomechanical performance is confirmed.

Background context. Dental implants are designed to replace a missing tooth. Implant stability is vital to achieving osseointegration and successful implantation. Although there are many implants available on the market, there is room for improvement. Purpose. We describe a new dental implant with improved primary stability features. Study design. Lab bench test studies. Methods. We evaluated the new implant using static and flexion–compression fatigue tests with compression loads, 35 Ncm tightening torque, displacement control, 0.01 mm/s actuator movement speed, and 9–10 Hz load application frequency, obtaining a cyclic load diagram. We applied variable cyclic loadings of predetermined amplitude and recorded the number of cycles until failure. The test ended with implant failure (breakage or permanent deformation) or reaching five million cycles for each load. Results. Mean stiffness was 1151.13 ± 133.62 SD N/mm, mean elastic limit force 463.94 ± 75.03 SD N, and displacement 0.52 ± 0.04 SD mm, at failure force 663.21 ± 54.23 SD N and displacement 1.56 ± 0.18 SD mm, fatigue load limit 132.6 ± 10.4 N, and maximum bending moment 729.3 ± 69.43 mm/N. Conclusions. The implant fatigue limit is satisfactory for incisor and canine teeth and between the values for premolars and molars for healthy patients. The system exceeds five million cycles when subjected to a 132.60 N load, ensuring long-lasting life against loads below the fatigue limit.