3D-Printed Patient-Customized Artificial Vertebral Body for Spinal Reconstruction after Total En Bloc Spondylectomy of Complex Multi-Level Spinal Tumors
Three dimensional (3D)-printing technology facilitates complex spine surgery with unique advantages in artificial vertebral body design and manufacturing. In this study, we aimed to demonstrate how a 3D-printed spinal implant is utilized in the management of multi-level spinal tumors and integrates with comprehensive oncologic treatment. Eight spinal or paraspinal tumor patients requiring spinal reconstruction after total en bloc spondylectomy were selected as candidates for 3D-printed titanium artificial vertebral body implants. All patients underwent surgery on three or more vertebral segments or complex spinal junction segments. The clinical, oncological, and surgical characteristics of patients were collected. Of the eight candidates, seven suffered from pain and/or limb disorder. Six underwent successful 3D-printed spinal implantation, while two failed due to implant mismatching and were converted to conventional reconstruction. Of the six patients undergoing 3D-printed spinal implant surgery: (i) Five had recurrent tumors; (ii) three underwent neoadjuvant therapy; (iii) the median surgery time was 414 min; (iv) the median blood loss was 2150 ml; (v) the median blood transfusion was 2000 ml; (vi) the median length of hospital stay was 9 days; (vii) four patients received adjuvant therapy after surgery; and (viii) all patients experienced no pain, moved freely, and had no local recurrence at a median of 11.5 months post-operative follow-up. Spinal reconstruction with a 3D-printed titanium artificial vertebral body allows for total en bloc resection of complex multi-level spinal tumors. Combined with neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, these patients had excellent postoperative outcomes, longterm normal spinal function, and associated low local recurrence probability.
1. Wixted CM, Peterson JR, Kadakia RJ, et al., 2021, Three dimensional Printing in Orthopaedic Surgery: Current Applications and Future Developments. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev, 5:e20.00230–11. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-20-00230
2. Ejnisman L, Gobbato B, de França Camargo AF, et al., 2021, Three-dimensional Printing in Orthopedics: From the Basics to Surgical Applications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med, 14:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-020-09691-3
3. Skelley NW, Smith MJ, Ma R, et al., 2019, Three-dimensional Printing Technology in Orthopaedics. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 27:918–25. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00746
4. Dhawan A, Kennedy PM, Rizk EB, et al., 2019, Three-dimensional Bioprinting for Bone and Cartilage Restoration in Orthopaedic Surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 27:e215–26. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00632
5. Charest-Morin R, Fisher CG, Sahgal A, et al., 2019, Primary Bone Tumor of the Spine-An Evolving Field: What a General Spine Surgeon Should Know. Global Spine J, 9:108S–16.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568219828727
6. Howell EP, Williamson T, Karikari I, et al., 2019, Total en Bloc Resection of Primary and Metastatic Spine Tumors. Ann Transl Med, 7:226. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.01.25
7. Sheha ED, Gandhi SD, Colman MW, 2019, 3D Printing in Spine Surgery. Ann Transl Med, 7:S164. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.08.88
8. Wallace N, Schaffer NE, Aleem IS, et al., 2020, 3D-printed Patient-specific Spine Implants: A Systematic Review. Clin Spine Surg, 33:400–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001026
9. Willemsen K, Nizak R, Noordmans HJ, et al., 2019, Challenges in the Design and Regulatory Approval of 3D-printed Surgical Implants: A Two-case Series. Lancet Digit Health, 1:e163–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30067-6
10. Gupta SK, Gahlot S, Singh R, et al., 2019, Spinal Tumors and Tumor-like Masses: Relevance of Initial Imaging, Karnofsky Performance Status, Age, Location, and Cord Edema. J Clin Imaging Sci, 9:21.
11. Whitmore RG, Stephen JH, Vernick C, et al., 2014, ASA Grade and Charlson Comorbidity Index of Spinal Surgery Patients: Correlation with Complications and Societal Costs. Spine J, 14:31–8.
12. Wong RM, Wong PY, Liu C, et al., 2021, 3D Printing in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Scoping Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Bone Joint Res, 10:807–19. https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.1012.BJR-2021-0288.R2
13. Azimi P, Yazdanian T, Benzel EC, et al., 2021, 3D-printed Navigation Template in Cervical Spine Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Spine J, 30:389–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06601-6
14. Senkoylu A, Daldal I, Cetinkaya M, 2020, 3D printing and spine surgery. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 28:2309499020927081. https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499020927081
15. Burnard JL, Parr WC, Choy WJ, et al., 2020, 3D-printed Spine Surgery Implants: A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Clinical Safety Profile of Patient-specific and Off-the shelf Devices. Eur Spine J, 29:1248–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06236-2
16. Fiani B, Newhouse A, Cathel A, et al., 2021, Implications of 3-Dimensional Printed Spinal Implants on the Outcomes in Spine Surgery. J Korean Neurosurg Soc, 64:495–504. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2020.0272
17. Tshephe TS, Akinwamide SO, Olevsky E, et al., 2022, Additive Manufacturing of Titanium-based Alloys-a Review of Methods, Properties, Challenges, and Prospects. Heliyon, 8:e09041.
18. Awad A, Fina F, Goyanes A, et al., 2021, Advances in Powder Bed Fusion 3D Printing in Drug Delivery and Healthcare. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 174:406–24.
19. Ginestra P, Ferraro RM, Zohar-Hauber K, et al., 2020, Selective Laser Melting and Electron Beam Melting of Ti6Al4V for Orthopedic Applications: A Comparative Study on the Applied Building Direction. Materials (Basel), 13:5584.
20. Pasang T, Tavlovich B, Yannay O, et al., 2021, Directionally dependent Mechanical Properties of Ti6Al4V Manufactured by Electron Beam Melting (EBM) and Selective Laser Melting (SLM). Materials (Basel), 14:3603.
21. Tevet O, Svetlizky D, Harel D, et al., 2022, Measurement of the Anisotropic Dynamic Elastic Constants of Additive Manufactured and Wrought Ti6Al4V Alloys. Materials (Basel), 15:638.
22. Wang H, Su K, Su L, et al., 2019, Comparison of 3D-printed Porous Tantalum and Titanium Scaffolds on Osteointegration and Osteogenesis. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 104:109908.
23. Rinaldi M, Cecchini F, Pigliaru L, et al., 2020, Additive Manufacturing of Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) for Space Applications: A Nanosat Polymeric Structure. Polymers (Basel). 13:11.
24. Yao J, Dong B, Sun J, et al., 2020, Accuracy and Reliability of Computer-aided Anatomical Measurements for Vertebral Body and Disc Based on Computed Tomography Scans. Orthop Surg, 12:1182–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12729
25. Lador R, Regev G, Salame K, et al., 2020, Use of 3-Dimensional Printing Technology in Complex Spine Surgeries. World Neurosurg, 133:e327–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.09.002
26. Zhuang H, Wei F, Jiang L, et al., 2020, Assessment of Spinal Tumor Treatment Using Implanted 3D-Printed Vertebral Bodies with Robotic Stereotactic Radiotherapy. Innovation (N Y). 1:100040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2020.100040
27. Amin T, Parr WC, Mobbs RJ, 2021, Opinion Piece: Patient-Specific Implants May Be the Next Big Thing in Spinal Surgery. J Pers Med, 11:498. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11060498
28. Sun Y, Zhang X, Luo M, et al., 2021, Plasma Spray vs. Electrochemical Deposition: Toward a Better Osteogenic Effect of Hydroxyapatite Coatings on 3D-Printed Titanium Scaffolds. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 9:705774. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.705774
29. Mei Y, He C, Gao C, et al., 2021, 3D-Printed Degradable Anti-Tumor Scaffolds for Controllable Drug Delivery. Int J Bioprint, 7:418. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v7i4