Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 2/2019

01-06-2019 | Case Report

Designing patient-specific solutions using biomodelling and 3D-printing for revision lumbar spine surgery

Authors: Ganesha K. Thayaparan, Mark G. Owbridge, Robert G. Thompson, Paul S. D’Urso

Published in: European Spine Journal | Special Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the variety of “off-the-shelf” implants and instrumentation, outcomes following revision lumbosacral surgery are inconstant. Revision fusion surgery presents a unique set of patient-specific challenges that may not be adequately addressed using universal kits. This study aims to describe how patient-specific factors, surgeon requirements, and healthcare efficiencies were integrated to design and manufacture anatomically matched surgical tools and implants to complement a minimally invasive posterior approach for revision lumbar fusion surgery.

Methods

A 72-year-old woman presented with sciatica and a complex L5–S1 pseudoarthrosis 12 months after L2–S1 fixation surgery for symptomatic degenerative scoliosis. Patient computed tomography data were used to develop 1:1 scale biomodels of the bony lumbosacral spine for pre-operative planning, patient education, and intraoperative reference. The surgeon collaborated with engineers and developed a patient-specific 3D-printed titanium lumbosacral fixation implant secured by L2–L5, S2, and iliac screws. Sizes and trajectories for the S2 and iliac screws were simulated using biomodelling to develop a stereotactic 3D-printed drill guide. Self-docking 3D-printed nylon tubular retractors specific to patient tissue depth and bony anatomy at L5–S1 were developed for a minimally invasive transforaminal approach. The pre-selected screws were separately sourced, bundled with the patient-specific devices, and supplied as a kit to the hospital before surgery.

Results

At 6-month follow-up, the patient reported resolution of symptoms. No evidence of implant dysfunction was observed on radiography.

Conclusion

Pre-operative planning combined with biomodelling and 3D printing is a viable process that enables surgical techniques, equipment, and implants to meet patient and surgeon-specific requirements for revision lumbar fusion surgery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kaiser MG, Eck JC, Groff MW, Watters WC 3rd, Dailey AT, Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Sharan A, Wang JC, Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS, Ghogawala Z (2014) Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 1: introduction and methodology. J Neurosurg Spine 21:2–6. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14257 CrossRefPubMed Kaiser MG, Eck JC, Groff MW, Watters WC 3rd, Dailey AT, Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Sharan A, Wang JC, Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS, Ghogawala Z (2014) Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 1: introduction and methodology. J Neurosurg Spine 21:2–6. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3171/​2014.​4.​SPINE14257 CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference D’Urso PS, Askin G, Earwaker JS, Merry GS, Thompson RG, Barker TM, Effeney DJ (1999) Spinal biomodeling. Spine 24:1247–1251CrossRefPubMed D’Urso PS, Askin G, Earwaker JS, Merry GS, Thompson RG, Barker TM, Effeney DJ (1999) Spinal biomodeling. Spine 24:1247–1251CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference D’Urso PS, Williamson OD, Thompson RG (2005) Biomodeling as an aid to spinal instrumentation. Spine 30:2841–2845CrossRefPubMed D’Urso PS, Williamson OD, Thompson RG (2005) Biomodeling as an aid to spinal instrumentation. Spine 30:2841–2845CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Zheng F, Cammisa FP Jr, Sandhu HS, Girardi FP, Khan SN (2002) Factors predicting hospital stay, operative time, blood loss, and transfusion in patients undergoing revision posterior lumbar spine decompression, fusion, and segmental instrumentation. Spine 27:818–824CrossRefPubMed Zheng F, Cammisa FP Jr, Sandhu HS, Girardi FP, Khan SN (2002) Factors predicting hospital stay, operative time, blood loss, and transfusion in patients undergoing revision posterior lumbar spine decompression, fusion, and segmental instrumentation. Spine 27:818–824CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Designing patient-specific solutions using biomodelling and 3D-printing for revision lumbar spine surgery
Authors
Ganesha K. Thayaparan
Mark G. Owbridge
Robert G. Thompson
Paul S. D’Urso
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue Special Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5684-z

Other articles of this Special Issue 2/2019

European Spine Journal 2/2019 Go to the issue