Getting PEEK to Stick to Bone: The Development of Porous PEEK for Interbody Fusion Devices

Interbody fusion cages are routinely implanted during spinal fusion procedures to facilitate arthrodesis of a degenerated or unstable vertebral segment. Current cages are most commonly made from polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) due to its favorable mechanical properties and imaging characteristics. However, the smooth surface of current PEEK cages may limit implant osseointegration and may inhibit successful fusion. We present the development and clinical application of the first commercially available porous PEEK fusion cage (COHERE) ® that aims to enhance PEEK osseointegration and spinal fusion outcomes. The porous PEEK structure is extruded directly from the underlying solid and mimics the structural and mechanical properties of trabecular bone to support bone ingrowth and implant fixation. Biomechanical testing of the COHERE device has demonstrated greater expulsion resistance versus smooth PEEK cages with ridges and greater adhesion strength of porous PEEK versus plasma-sprayed titanium coated PEEK surfaces. In vitro experiments have shown favorable cell attachment to porous PEEK and greater proliferation and mineralization of cell cultures grown on porous PEEK versus smooth PEEK and smooth titanium surfaces, suggesting that the porous structure enhances bone formation at the cellular level. At the implant level, preclinical animal studies have found comparable bone ingrowth into porous PEEK as those previously reported for porous titanium, leading to twice the fixation strength of smooth PEEK implants. Finally, two clinical case studies are presented demonstrating the effectiveness of the COHERE device in cervical spinal fusion.

[1]  J. Noh,et al.  Cold-spray coating of hydroxyapatite on a three-dimensional polyetheretherketone implant and its biocompatibility evaluated by in vitro and in vivo minipig model. , 2017, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[2]  B. Boyan,et al.  Osteogenic response of human MSCs and osteoblasts to hydrophilic and hydrophobic nanostructured titanium implant surfaces. , 2016, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[3]  L. Hołysz,et al.  Time-dependent changes of surface properties of polyether ether ketone caused by air plasma treatment , 2016 .

[4]  K. Gall,et al.  Impact of surface porosity and topography on the mechanical behavior of high strength biomedical polymers. , 2016, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

[5]  R. Guldberg,et al.  Do Surface Porosity and Pore Size Influence Mechanical Properties and Cellular Response to PEEK? , 2016, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[6]  Faleh Tamimi,et al.  Improving PEEK bioactivity for craniofacial reconstruction using a 3D printed scaffold embedded with mesenchymal stem cells , 2016, Journal of biomaterials applications.

[7]  H. Wilke,et al.  Does impaction of titanium-coated interbody fusion cages into the disc space cause wear debris or delamination? , 2016, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[8]  Andrés J. García,et al.  Simple coating with fibronectin fragment enhances stainless steel screw osseointegration in healthy and osteoporotic rats. , 2015, Biomaterials.

[9]  B. Boyan,et al.  Role of integrin α2 β1 in mediating osteoblastic differentiation on three-dimensional titanium scaffolds with submicron-scale texture. , 2015, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[10]  W. Walsh,et al.  Plasma-sprayed titanium coating to polyetheretherketone improves the bone-implant interface. , 2015, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[11]  H. Kremers,et al.  Biological strategies for improved osseointegration and osteoinduction of porous metal orthopedic implants. , 2015, Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews.

[12]  R. Guldberg,et al.  High-strength, surface-porous polyether-ether-ketone for load-bearing orthopedic implants. , 2015, Acta biomaterialia.

[13]  A. Kennedy,et al.  Porous poly-ether ether ketone (PEEK) manufactured by a novel powder route using near-spherical salt bead porogens: characterisation and mechanical properties. , 2015, Materials science & engineering. C, Materials for biological applications.

[14]  Barbara D Boyan,et al.  Additively manufactured 3D porous Ti-6Al-4V constructs mimic trabecular bone structure and regulate osteoblast proliferation, differentiation and local factor production in a porosity and surface roughness dependent manner , 2014, Biofabrication.

[15]  R. G. Richards,et al.  Osseointegration of machined, injection moulded and oxygen plasma modified PEEK implants in a sheep model. , 2014, Biomaterials.

[16]  H. Wong,et al.  Cytocompatibility, osseointegration, and bioactivity of three-dimensional porous and nanostructured network on polyetheretherketone. , 2013, Biomaterials.

[17]  D. Devine,et al.  Coating of carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone implants with titanium to improve bone apposition. , 2013, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[18]  V. Sikavitsas,et al.  Mechanical and in Vitro Investigation of a Porous PEEK Foam for Medical Device Implants , 2013, Journal of applied biomaterials & functional materials.

[19]  K. Sandhage,et al.  Differential responses of osteoblast lineage cells to nanotopographically-modified, microroughened titanium-aluminum-vanadium alloy surfaces. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[20]  J. Werkmeister,et al.  Mechanical evaluation and cell response of woven polyetheretherketone scaffolds. , 2012, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[21]  R. Delamarter,et al.  Spinal Fusion in the United States: Analysis of Trends From 1998 to 2008 , 2012, Spine.

[22]  Hyoun‐Ee Kim,et al.  The electron beam deposition of titanium on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and the resulting enhanced biological properties. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[23]  R. Roeder,et al.  Mechanical properties of hydroxyapatite whisker reinforced polyetherketoneketone composite scaffolds. , 2009, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

[24]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: a systematic review. , 2009, Clinical oral implants research.

[25]  T. Webster,et al.  The impact of diamond nanocrystallinity on osteoblast functions. , 2009, Biomaterials.

[26]  T. Nieminen,et al.  Amorphous and crystalline polyetheretherketone: Mechanical properties and tissue reactions during a 3-year follow-up. , 2008, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[27]  S. Kurtz,et al.  PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[28]  David J Mooney,et al.  Quantitative assessment of scaffold and growth factor‐mediated repair of critically sized bone defects , 2007, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[29]  K. Jandt,et al.  Does the nanometre scale topography of titanium influence protein adsorption and cell proliferation? , 2006, Colloids and surfaces. B, Biointerfaces.

[30]  D. Kaplan,et al.  Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[31]  P. Mummaneni,et al.  Current Treatment Strategies for the Painful Lumbar Motion Segment: Posterolateral Fusion Versus Interbody Fusion , 2005, Spine.

[32]  W. Linhart,et al.  Response of primary fibroblasts and osteoblasts to plasma treated polyetheretherketone (PEEK) surfaces , 2005, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[33]  T. Webster,et al.  Nanometer surface roughness increases select osteoblast adhesion on carbon nanofiber compacts. , 2004, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[34]  B. Hallgrímsson,et al.  Comparison of Microcomputed Tomographic and Microradiographic Measurements of Cortical Bone Porosity , 2004, Calcified Tissue International.

[35]  Alf Nachemson,et al.  Spinal-fusion surgery - the case for restraint. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  K. Liao,et al.  Tensile properties, tension-tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone-hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[37]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[38]  W R Walsh,et al.  Morphometric and mechanical evaluation of titanium implant integration: comparison of five surface structures. , 2000, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[39]  P. Rüegsegger,et al.  Direct Three‐Dimensional Morphometric Analysis of Human Cancellous Bone: Microstructural Data from Spine, Femur, Iliac Crest, and Calcaneus , 1999, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[40]  B D Boyan,et al.  Effect of titanium surface roughness on proliferation, differentiation, and protein synthesis of human osteoblast-like cells (MG63). , 1995, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[41]  T. Bauer,et al.  Biological response to chopped-carbon-fiber-reinforced peek. , 1992, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[42]  A. Schultz,et al.  Analysis of Loads on the Lumbar Spine , 1981, Spine.

[43]  R. Robinson,et al.  The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. , 1958, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[44]  R. Guldberg,et al.  Local deformation behavior of surface porous polyether-ether-ketone. , 2017, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

[45]  B. Boyan,et al.  Requirement for both micron- and submicron scale structure for synergistic responses of osteoblasts to substrate surface energy and topography. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[46]  G. Stein,et al.  Concepts of osteoblast growth and differentiation: basis for modulation of bone cell development and tissue formation. , 1992, Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists.

[47]  S. Goldstein The mechanical properties of trabecular bone: dependence on anatomic location and function. , 1987, Journal of biomechanics.

[48]  W. Hayes,et al.  Multiaxial strength characteristics of trabecular bone. , 1983, Journal of biomechanics.

[49]  A M Weinstein,et al.  Interface mechanics of porous titanium implants. , 1981, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[50]  A. Nachemson,et al.  Lumbar intradiscal pressure. Experimental studies on post-mortem material. , 1960, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[51]  A. Marsk Studies on weight-distribution upon the lower extremities in individuals working in a standing position: assessing the results of the measurements of load-pressure differences against the background of handedness and some clinical observations. , 1958, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica. Supplementum.