Page 451 - IJB-10-2

International Journal of Bioprinting 3D-printed silicon nitride-PEEK implants

Consent for publication Handbook. 2nd ed. Norwich, NY; 2019: William Andrew
Publishing: 263-280.
Not applicable. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-812524-3.00015-6

Availability of data 11. Mendenhall S. 2017 Profile of hospital spine programs.
Orthop Network News. 2017;28(4):7-10.
Data are available from the corresponding author upon 12. Basgul C, Spece H, Sharma N, Thieringer FM, Kurtz SM.
reasonable request. Structure, properties, and bioactivity of 3D printed PAEKs
for implant applications: a systematic review. J Biomed Mater
References Res B Appl Biomater. 2021;109(11):1924-1941.
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.34845
1. Seaman S, Kerezoudis P, Bydon M, Torner JC, Hitchon
PW. Titanium vs. polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody 13. Rendas P, Figueiredo L, Machado C, Mourão A, Vidal
fusion: meta-analysis and review of the literature. C, Soares B. Mechanical performance and bioactivation
J Clin Neurosci. 2017;44:23-29. of 3D-printed PEEK for high-performance implant
doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.062 manufacture: a review. Prog Biomater. 2023;12(2):89-111.
doi: 10.1007/s40204-022-00214-6
2. Bydon M, De la Garza-Ramos R, Abt NB, et al. Impact of
smoking on complication and pseudarthrosis rates after 14. Zheng Z, Liu P, Zhang X, et al. Strategies to improve bioactive
single- and 2-level posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine. and antibacterial properties of polyetheretherketone
Spine. 2014;39(21):1765-1770. (PEEK) for use as orthopedic implants. Mater Today Bio.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000527 2022;16:100402.
doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100402
3. Shriver MF, Lewis DJ, Kshettry VR, Rosenbaum BP,
Benzel EC, Mroz TE. Pseudoarthrosis rates in anterior 15. Roskies M, Jordan JO, Fang D, et al. Improving PEEK
cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis. bioactivity for craniofacial reconstruction using a 3D
Spine J. 2015;15(9):2016-2027. printed scaffold embedded with mesenchymal stem cells.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.05.010 J Biomater Appl. 2016;31(1):132-139.
doi: 10.1177/0885328216638636
4. Dede O, Thuillier D, Pekmezci M, et al. Revision surgery for
lumbar pseudarthrosis. Spine J. 2015;15(5):977-982. 16. Hickok N, Rochfort ETJ, Jaekel DJ, Richards RG, Moriarty
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.05.039 TF, Poulsson AHC. Bacterial interactions with PEEK.
In: Kurtz SM, ed. PEEK Biomaterials Handbook. 2nd ed.
5. Jain S, Eltorai AE, Ruttiman R, Daniels AH. Advances Norwich, NY: William Andrew Publishing; 2019: 121-146.
in spinal interbody cages. Orthop Surg. 2016;8(3): doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-812524-3.00009-0
278-284.
doi: 10.1111/os.12264 17. Basgul C, Yu T, MacDonald DW, Siskey R, Marcolongo M,
Kurtz SM. Structure-property relationships for 3D printed
6. Tan ET, Ling JM, Dinesh SK. The feasibility of producing PEEK intervertebral lumbar cages produced using fused
patient-specific acrylic cranioplasty implants with a low- filament fabrication. J Mater Res. 2018;33(14):2040-2051.
cost 3D printer. J Neurosurg. 2016;124(5):1531-1537. doi: 10.1557/jmr.2018.178
doi: 10.3171/2015.5.JNS15119
18. Spece H, Yu T, Law A, Marcolongo M, Kurtz SM. 3D printed
7. Wilcox B, Mobbs RJ, Wu AM, Phan K. Systematic review porous PEEK created via fused filament fabrication for
of 3D printing in spinal surgery: the current state of play. osteoconductive orthopaedic surfaces. J Mech Behav Biomed
J Spine Surg. 2017;3(3):433-443. Mater. 2020:103850.
doi: 10.21037/jss.2017.09.01 doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103850
8. Bose S, Tarafder S. Calcium phosphate ceramic systems in 19. Webster TJ, Patel AA, Rahaman MN, Bal BS. Anti-infective
growth factor and drug delivery for bone tissue engineering: and osteointegration properties of silicon nitride, poly(ether
a review. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(4):1401-1421. ether ketone), and titanium implants. Acta Biomater.
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.11.017 2012;8(12):4447-4454.
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2012.07.038
9. Oosterbos CJ, Vogely H, Nijhof MW, et al. Osseointegration
of hydroxyapatite-coated and noncoated Ti6Al4V 20. Gorth DJ, Puckett S, Ercan B, Webster TJ, Rahaman M, Bal
implants in the presence of local infection: a comparative BS. Decreased bacteria activity on Si3N4 surfaces compared
histomorphometrical study in rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res. with PEEK or titanium. Int J Nanomed. 2012:4829-4840.
2002;60(3):339-347. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S35190
doi: 10.1002/jbm.1288
21. Du X, Lee SS, Blugan G, Ferguson SJ. Silicon nitride as a
10. Kurtz SM. Development and clinical performance of PEEK biomedical material: an overview. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(12).
intervertebral cages. In: Kurtz S, ed. PEEK Biomaterials doi: 10.3390/ijms23126551

Volume 10 Issue 2 (2024) 443 doi: 10.36922/ijb.2124