1
|
Foroughi AH, Valeri C, Razavi MJ. A review of computational optimization of bone scaffold architecture: methods, challenges, and perspectives. PROGRESS IN BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING (BRISTOL, ENGLAND) 2024; 7:012003. [PMID: 39655853 DOI: 10.1088/2516-1091/ad879a] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 10/16/2024] [Indexed: 12/18/2024]
Abstract
The design and optimization of bone scaffolds are critical for the success of bone tissue engineering (BTE) applications. This review paper provides a comprehensive analysis of computational optimization methods for bone scaffold architecture, focusing on the balance between mechanical stability, biological compatibility, and manufacturability. Finite element method (FEM), computational fluid dynamics (CFD), and various optimization algorithms are discussed for their roles in simulating and refining scaffold designs. The integration of multiobjective optimization and topology optimization has been highlighted for developing scaffolds that meet the multifaceted requirements of BTE. Challenges such as the need for consideration of manufacturing constraints and the incorporation of degradation and bone regeneration models into the optimization process have been identified. The review underscores the potential of advanced computational tools and additive manufacturing techniques in evolving the field of BTE, aiming to improve patient outcomes in bone tissue regeneration. The reliability of current optimization methods is examined, with suggestions for incorporating non-deterministic approaches andin vivovalidations to enhance the practical application of optimized scaffolds. The review concludes with a call for further research into artificial intelligence-based methods to advance scaffold design and optimization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali H Foroughi
- Department of Mechanical Engineering, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY 13902, United States of America
| | - Caleb Valeri
- Department of Mechanical Engineering, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY 13902, United States of America
| | - Mir Jalil Razavi
- Department of Mechanical Engineering, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY 13902, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Liu C, Zhao M, Zhang W, Wang C, Hu B, Wang K, Xu W, Li L, Si H. Biomechanical assessment of different transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion constructs in normal and osteoporotic condition: a finite element analysis. Spine J 2024; 24:1121-1131. [PMID: 38316364 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2023] [Revised: 01/06/2024] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT With the aging population, osteoporosis, which leads to poor fusion, has become a common challenge for lumbar surgery. In addition, most people with osteoporosis are elderly individuals with poor surgical tolerance, and poor bone quality can also weaken the stability of internal fixation. PURPOSE This study compared the fixation strength of the bilateral traditional trajectory screw structure (TT-TT), the bilateral cortical bone trajectory screw structure (CBT-CBT), and the hybrid CBT-TT (CBT screws at the cranial level and TT screws at the caudal level) structure under different bone mineral density conditions. STUDY DESIGN A finite element (FE) analysis study. METHODS Above all, we established a healthy adult lumbar spine model. Second, under normal and osteoporotic conditions, three transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) models were established: bilateral traditional trajectory (TT-TT) screw fixation, bilateral cortical bone trajectory (CBT-CBT) screw fixation, and hybrid cortical bone trajectory screw and traditional trajectory screw (CBT-TT) fixation. Finally, a 500-N compression load with a torque of 10 N/m was applied to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. We compared the range of motion (ROM), adjacent disc stress, cage stress, and posterior fixation stress of the different fusion models. RESULTS Under different bone mineral density conditions, the range of motion of the fusion segment was significantly reduced. Compared to normal bone conditions, the ROM of the L4-L5 segment, the stress of the adjacent intervertebral disc, the surface stress of the cage, and the maximum stress of the posterior fixation system were all increased in osteoporosis. Under most loads, the ROM and surface stress of the cage and the maximum stress of the posterior fixation system of the TT-TT structure are the lowest under normal bone mineral density conditions. However, under osteoporotic conditions, the fixation strength of the CBT-CBT and CBT-TT structures are higher than that of the TT-TT structures under certain load conditions. At the same time, the surface stress of the intervertebral fusion cage and the maximum stress of the posterior fixation system for the two structures are lower than those of the TT-TT structure. CONCLUSION Under normal bone mineral density conditions, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion combined with TT-TT fixation provides the best biomechanictability. However, under osteoporotic conditions, CBT-CBT and CBT-TT structures have higher fixed strength compared to TT-TT structures. The hybrid CBT-TT structure exhibits advantages in minimal trauma and fixation strength. Therefore, this seems to be an alternative fixation method for patients with osteoporosis and degenerative spinal diseases. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE This study provides biomechanical support for the clinical application of hybrid CBT-TT structure for osteoporotic patients undergoing TLIF surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chen Liu
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Mengmeng Zhao
- School of Physics and Electronic Science, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, Shandong, 250014, P.R. China
| | - Wencan Zhang
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Chongyi Wang
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Bingtao Hu
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Kaibin Wang
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Wanlong Xu
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Le Li
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China
| | - Haipeng Si
- Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250012, P.R. China; Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University(Qingdao), Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Qingdao, Shandong, 266035, P.R. China.
| |
Collapse
|