Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Structure–property relationships for 3D-printed PEEK intervertebral lumbar cages produced using fused filament fabrication

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent advances in the additive manufacturing technology now enable fused filament fabrication of polyetheretherketone (PEEK). A standardized lumbar fusion cage design was 3D printed with different speeds of the printhead nozzle to investigate whether 3D-printed PEEK cages exhibit sufficient material properties for lumbar fusion applications. It was observed that the compressive and shear strength of the 3D-printed cages were 63–71% of the machined cages, whereas the torsion strength was 92%. The printing speed is an important printing parameter for 3D-printed PEEK, which resulted in up to 20% porosity at the highest speed of 3000 mm/min, leading to reduced cage strength. Printing speeds below 1500 mm/min can be chosen as the optimal printing speed for this printer to reduce the printing time while maintaining strength. The crystallinity of printed PEEK did not differ significantly from the as-machined PEEK cages from extruded rods, indicating that the processing provides similar microstructure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 6
FIG. 7
FIG. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. P. Tack, J. Victor, P. Gemmel, and L. Annemans: 3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: A systematic literature review. Biomed. Eng. Online 15, 115 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A.E. Eltorai, E. Nguyen, and A.H. Daniels: Three-dimensional printing in orthopedic surgery. Orthopedics 38, 684 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. D.M. Gibbs, M. Vaezi, S. Yang, and R.O. Oreffo: Hope versus hype: What can additive manufacturing realistically offer trauma and orthopedic surgery? Regener. Med. 9, 535 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. N. Martelli, C. Serrano, H. van den Brink, J. Pineau, P. Prognon, I. Borget, and S. El Batti: Advantages and disadvantages of 3-dimensional printing in surgery: A systematic review. Surgery 159, 1485 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. E. Provaggi, J.J.H. Leong, and D.M. Kalaskar: Applications of 3D printing in the management of severe spinal conditions. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part H 231, 471 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. C.L. Ventola: Medical applications for 3D printing: Current and projected uses. P&T 39, 704 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. Janusz, S. Konstanty, G. Roman, and M. Adrian: Rapid prototyping in the intervertebral implant design process. Rapid Prototyp. J. 21, 735 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. N. de Beer and A. van der Merwe: Patient-specific intervertebral disc implants using rapid manufacturing technology. Rapid Prototyp. J. 19, 126 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. J.O. Figueroa-Cavazos, E. Flores-Villalba, J.A. Diaz-Elizondo, O. Martinez-Romero, C.A. Rodriguez, and H.R. Siller: Design concepts of polycarbonate-based intervertebral lumbar cages: Finite element analysis and compression testing. Appl. Bionics Biomechanics 2016, 7149182 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. T. Serra, C. Capelli, R. Toumpaniari, I.R. Orriss, J.J. Leong, K. Dalgarno, and D.M. Kalaskar: Design and fabrication of 3D-printed anatomically shaped lumbar cage for intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration treatment. Biofabrication 8, 035001 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. O. Figueroa, C.A. Rodríguez, H.R. Siller, O. Martinez-Romero, E. Flores-Villalba, J. Díaz-Elizondo, and R. Ramírez: Lumbar cage design concepts based on additive manufacturing. In High Value Manufacturing: Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping, P.H.A. Silva Bártolo, A.C.S. de Lemos, and A.M.H. Pereira, eds. (CRC Press, New York, USA, 2013); ch. 102.

    Google Scholar 

  12. K.C. McGilvray, E.I. Waldorff, J. Easley, H.B. Seim, N. Zhang, R.J. Linovitz, J.T. Ryaby, and C.M. Puttlitz: Evaluation of a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) titanium composite interbody spacer in an ovine lumbar interbody fusion model: Biomechanical, microcomputed tomographic, and histologic analyses. Spine J. 17, 1907–1916 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. K. Asil and C. Yaldiz: Retrospective comparison of radiological and clinical outcomes of PLIF and TLIF techniques in patients who underwent lumbar spinal posterior stabilization. Medicine 95, (2016).

  14. P.J.d.S. Bartolo, A.C.S.d. Lemos, A.M.H. Pereira, A.J.D.S. Mateus, C. Ramos, C.D. Santos, D. Oliveira, E. Pinto, F. Craveiro, H.M.C.d.R.T.G. Bartolo, H.d.A. Almeida, I. Sousa, J.M. Matias, L. Durao, M. Gaspar, N.M.F. Alves, P. Carreira, T. Ferreira, and T. Marques: High Value Manufacturing: Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid Prototyping: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advanced Research in Leiria, Portugal, 1–5 October, 2013 (CRC Press, Inc., Leira, Portugal, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Vadapalli, K. Sairyo, V.K. Goel, M. Robon, A. Biyani, A. Khandha, and N.A. Ebraheim: Biomechanical rationale for using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spacers for lumbar interbody fusion—A finite element study. Spine 31, E992 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. J.W. Duncan and R.A. Bailey: An analysis of fusion cage migration in unilateral and bilateral fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur. Spine J. 22, 439 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. M. Schmidt, D. Pohle, and T. Rechtenwald: Selective laser sintering of PEEK. CIRP Ann. 56, 205 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. S. Berretta, K.E. Evans, and O. Ghita: Processability of PEEK, a new polymer for high temperature laser sintering (HT-LS). Eur. Polym. J. 68 (Suppl. C), 243 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. W.Z. Wu, P. Geng, J. Zhao, Y. Zhang, D.W. Rosen, and H.B. Zhang: Manufacture and thermal deformation analysis of semicrystalline polymer polyether ether ketone by 3D printing. Mater. Res. Innovations 18 (Suppl. 5), S5 (2014).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. M. Vaezi and S. Yang: Extrusion-based additive manufacturing of PEEK for biomedical applications. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 10, 123 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. K.M. Rahman, T. Letcher, and R. Reese: Mechanical properties of additively manufactured PEEK components using fused filament fabrication. In ASME 2015 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition Volume 2A: Advanced Manufacturing (Houston, Texas, 2015); p. 57359.

    Google Scholar 

  22. G. Cicala, A. Latteri, B. Del Curto, A. Lo Russo, G. Recca, and S. Fare: Engineering thermoplastics for additive manufacturing: A critical perspective with experimental evidence to support functional applications. J. Appl. Biomater. Funct. Mater. 15, (2017). doi: https://doi.org/10.5301/jabfm.5000343.

  23. S.M. Kurtz, ed.: Chapter 2-synthesis and processing of PEEK for surgical implants. In PEEK Biomaterials Handbook (William Andrew Publishing, Oxford, U.K., 2012); p. 9.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. S.M. Green and J. Schlegel: A Polyaryletherketone Biomaterial for Use in Medical Implant Applications (Rapra Technology Limited, Shawbury, Brussels, U.K., 2001); pp. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Research Report: Interlaboratory Study to Establish Precision Statements for ASTM F2077 (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2014); pp. F04–F1014.

  26. ASTM F2077-17: Test Methods for Intervertebral Body Fusion Devices (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2017).

    Google Scholar 

  27. ISO/IEC 17025:2005: General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories International Organization for Standardization (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2017).

    Google Scholar 

  28. T. Hildebrand and P. Rüegsegger: A new method for the model-independent assessment of thickness in three-dimensional images. J. Microsc. 185, 67 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. ASTM F2778-09(2015): Standard Test Method for Measurement of Percent Crystallinity of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Polymers by Means of Specular Reflectance Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (R-FTIR) (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2015). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1520/F2778-09R15.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Victrex: victrex_tds_450g, Lancashire, U.K., 2018.

  31. A.A. White and M.M. Panjabi: Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine (Lippincott, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  32. T.M. Keaveny and J.M. Buckley: Chapter 4-biomechanics of vertebral bone. In Spine Technology Handbook, S.M. Kurtz and A.A. Edidin, eds. (Academic Press, Burlington, Massachusetts, 2006); p. 63.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. H.J. Wilke, P. Neef, M. Caimi, T. Hoogland, and L.E. Claes: New in vivo measurements of pressures in the intervertebral disc in daily life. Spine 24, 755 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. M. Melkerson, J. Kirkpatrick, and S. Griffith: Spinal Implants: Are we Evaluating them Appropriately? (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2003).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. R.K. Chen, T.T. Lo, L. Chen, and A.J. Shih: Nano-CT characterization of structural voids and air bubbles in fused deposition modeling for additive manufacturing. In ASME 2015 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference Volume 1: Processing (Charlotte, North Carolina, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  36. M. Rybachuk, C. Alice Mauger, T. Fiedler, and A. Öchsner: Anisotropic mechanical properties of fused deposition modeled parts fabricated by using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene polymer. J. Polym. Eng., 37, 699 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. A. Sung-Hoon, M. Michael, O. Dan, R. Shad, and K.W. Paul: Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling ABS. Rapid Prototyp. J. 8, 248 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. M.C. Sobieraj and C.M. Rimnac: Chapter 5-fracture, fatigue, and notch behavior of PEEK. In PEEK Biomaterials Handbook, S.M. Kurtz, ed. (William Andrew Publishing, Oxford, U.K., 2012); p. 61.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. D. Jaekel, F.J. Medel, and S.M. Kurtz: Validation of crystallinity measurements of medical grade PEEK using specular reflectance FTIR-microscopy. In Annual Technical Conference—ANTEC, Conference Proceedings, Vol. 5, 2019; pp. 2511–2516.

    Google Scholar 

  40. D.J. Jaekel, D.W. MacDonald, and S.M. Kurtz: Characterization of PEEK biomaterials using the small punch test. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 4, 1275 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by NIH-R01 AR069119. We would like to thank Invibio for donating the medical grade PEEK derived filament and extruded rod stock used in the experiment. We would also like to thank Apium for their helpful advice and fruitful discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Implant Research Center, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104, USA

    Cemile Basgul, Daniel W. MacDonald, Ryan Siskey & Steven M. Kurtz

  2. Materials Science and Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104, USA

    Tony Yu & Michele Marcolongo

  3. Biomedical Engineering, Exponent, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104, USA

    Ryan Siskey & Steven M. Kurtz

Authors
  1. Cemile Basgul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tony Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel W. MacDonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ryan Siskey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michele Marcolongo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Steven M. Kurtz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cemile Basgul.

Supplementary Material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Basgul, C., Yu, T., MacDonald, D.W. et al. Structure–property relationships for 3D-printed PEEK intervertebral lumbar cages produced using fused filament fabrication. Journal of Materials Research 33, 2040–2051 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2018.178

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2018.178

Search

Navigation