Warp-knitted fabric structures for a novel biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc for the cervical spine
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract As an attempt to better replicate the complex kinematics of a natural disc, a novel biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc replacement (bioAID) has been developed containing a swelling hydrogel core as nucleus pulposus, a fiber jacket as annulus fibrosus and metal endplates to connect the device to the adjacent vertebrae. The first prototype consisted of a weft-knitted fiber jacket, in which only a single fiber was used to create the jacket structure. This can endanger the structural integrity of the complete device upon yarn damage. Therefore, in this study, several warp-knitted textile structures were assessed to (1) ensure structural integrity, (2) while allowing for swelling constraint of the hydrogel and (3) behaving as one integrated unit similar to the natural IVD. Moreover, the fiber jacket should (4) act as a scaffold that allows bone ingrowth to ensure long-term stability and (5) have a good durability, (6) be wear resistant and (7) have good manufacturing feasibility with good quality control. In this study, 4 different stitch patterns, including 2 × 1 and 1 × 1 lapping with and without a pillar stitch, were produced. The effect of the stitch pattern and stitch density on the fabric mechanical properties and device swelling and compressive strength was assessed. As a next step, the effect of using multiple layers of fabrics, mimicking the layered structure of annulus fibrosus, on the functional capacity of the bioAID was characterized. All textile structures were capable of limiting the swelling of the hydrogel while withstanding its internal pressure and showing sufficient wear resistance. However, only the 2 × 1 and 2 × 1 with pillar stitch had a pore size range that was suitable for cell infiltration to facilitate osseointegration as well as having the highest strength of the complete device to ensure safety under compression loading. Incorporating different number of jacket layers of these two stitch patterns did not show any significant effect. When also taking the structural parameters into consideration, the 2 × 1 lapping design with 4 layers was able to constrain hydrogel swelling, provide a high compressive strength, could facilitate cell infiltration and had dimensions within the range of a natural intervertebral disc.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology · Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy · Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. Webb R, Brammah T, Lunt M, Urwin M, Allison T, Symmons D (2003) Prevalence and predictors of intense, chronic, and disabling neck and back pain in the Uk general population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(11):1195–120210.1097/01.BRS.0000067430.49169.01 ↗
2. Smeathers JE, Joanes DN (1988) Lumbar intervertebral joints: a comparison between fresh and thawed specimens. J Biomech 21(5):425–43310.1016/0021-9290(88)90148-0 ↗
3. Shim CS et al (2007) CHARITI versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(9):1012–101810.1097/01.brs.0000260795.57798.a0 ↗
4. Rousseau MA, Bradford DS, Bertagnoli R, Hu SS, Lotz JC (2006) Disc arthroplasty design influences intervertebral kinematics and facet forces. Spine J 6:258–26610.1016/j.spinee.2005.07.004 ↗
5. C. A. M. Jacobs, C. J. Siepe, and K. Ito, “Viscoelastic cervical total disc replacement devices: Design concepts,” Spine Journal, vol. 20, no. 12. Elsevier, pp. 1911–1924, Aug-2020.10.1016/j.spinee.2020.08.007 ↗
6. Van Den Broek PR (2012) Development of a biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc. Eindhoven University of Technology10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182326305 ↗
7. Kirschbaum R, van Dingenen JLJ (1989) Advances in gel-spinning technology and Dyneema fiber applications Integration of fundamental polymer science and technology, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 178 19810.1007/978-94-009-1115-4_20 ↗
8. van den Broek PR, Huyghe JM, Wilson W, Ito K (2012) Design of next generation total disk replacements. J Biomech 45(1):134–14010.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.09.017 ↗
9. Elmogahzy YE (2019) Engineering textiles: integrating the design and manufacture of textile products. Eng. Text. Integr. Des. Manuf. Text. Prod., pp 1–448
10. Ghazanfari S, Werner A, Ghazanfari S, Weaver JC, Smit TH (2018) Morphogenesis of aligned collagen fibers in the annulus fibrosus: mammals versus avians. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 503(2):1168–117310.1016/j.bbrc.2018.06.136 ↗
11. Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JAA (1988) Analysis and measurement of neck loads. J Orthop Res 6(5):713–72010.1002/jor.1100060514 ↗
12. Arshad R, Schmidt H, El-Rich M, Moglo K (2022) Sensitivity of the cervical disc loads, translations, intradiscal pressure, and muscle activity due to segmental mass, disc stiffness, and muscle strength in an upright neutral posture. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 10(April):1–11
13. Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller AAJ, Andersson GBJ (1988) Load-displacement properties of lower cervical spine motion segments. J Biomech 21(9):769–77910.1016/0021-9290(88)90285-0 ↗
14. Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Zhang J, Baisden JL (2009) Physical properties of the human head: mass, center of gravity and moment of inertia. J Biomech 42(9):1177–119210.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.03.029 ↗
15. Funk JR, Cormier JM, Bain CE, Guzman H, Bonugli E, Manoogian SJ (2011) Head and neck loading in everyday and vigorous activities. Ann Biomed Eng 39(2):766–77610.1007/s10439-010-0183-3 ↗
16. Bogduk N, Mercer S (2000) Biomechanics of the cervical spine. I: normal kinematics. Clin Biomech 15:633–64810.1016/S0268-0033(00)00034-6 ↗
17. Jacobs CAM et al (2022) Biomechanical evaluation of a novel biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc in canine cervical cadaveric spines. JOR Spine 1251:1–10
18. Jacobs C, Wijlaars M, Harries M, Ito K, Kock L 2019 () A novel cervical biomimetic artificial intervertebral disc: a mechanical analysis. Eur Soc Biomech, p 1
19. Anbumani N (2007) Knitting Fundamentals, Machines, Structures and developments. New Age International
20. Kyosev Y (2019) Warp knitted fabrics construction. Warp Knitt. Fabr. Constr., pp 1–30210.1201/9780429094699 ↗
21. Frost B, Camarero-Espinosa S, Foster E (2019) Materials for the spine: anatomy, problems, and solutions. Materials (Basel) 12(2):25310.3390/ma12020253 ↗
22. Pospiech J, Stolke D, Wilke HJ, Claes LE (1999) Intradiscal pressure recordings in the cervical spine. Neurosurgery 44(2):379–38510.1097/00006123-199902000-00078 ↗
23. Wang K, Deng Z, Wang H, Li Z, Zhan H, Niu W (2017) influence of variations in stiffness of cervical ligaments on C5–C6 segment. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 72(1):129–13710.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.05.005 ↗
24. Werner JH, Rosenberg JH, Keeley KL, Agrawal DK (2018) Immunobiology of periprosthetic inflammation and pain following ultra-high-molecular-weight-polyethylene wear debris in the lumbar spine. Exp Rev Clin Immunol. Taylor and Francis Ltd.10.1080/1744666X.2018.1511428 ↗
25. Lee CK, Goel VK (2004) Artificial disc prosthesis: design concepts and criteria. Spine J 4(6):S209–S21810.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.011 ↗
26. Eijkelkamp MF, Huyghe JM, van Donkelaar CC, van Horn JR, Veldhuizen AG, Verkerke GJ (2001) Requirements for an artificial intervertebral disc. Int J Artif Organs 24(5):311–32110.1177/039139880102400510 ↗
27. Kienapfel H, Sprey C, Wilke A, Griss P (1999) Implant fixation by bone ingrowth. J Arthroplasty 14(3):355–36810.1016/S0883-5403(99)90063-3 ↗
28. Li G et al (2016) In vitro and in vivo study of additive manufactured porous Ti6Al4V scaffolds for repairing bone defects. Sci Rep 6:1–1110.1038/s41598-016-0001-8 ↗
29. Karageorgiou V, Kaplan D (2005) Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 26(27):5474–549110.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.02.002 ↗
30. Taniguchi N et al (2016) Effect of pore size on bone ingrowth into porous titanium implants fabricated by additive manufacturing: an in vivo experiment. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 59:690–70110.1016/j.msec.2015.10.069 ↗
31. Chen Z et al (2020) Influence of the pore size and porosity of selective laser melted Ti6Al4V ELI porous scaffold on cell proliferation, osteogenesis and bone ingrowth. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 106:1–1310.1016/j.msec.2019.110289 ↗
32. Augustin J et al (2022) Effect of pore size on tissue ingrowth and osteoconductivity in biodegradable Mg alloy scaffolds. J. Appl. Biomater. Funct. Mater. 20:1–18
33. Li W et al (2022) Pore size of 3D-printed polycaprolactone/polyethylene glycol/hydroxyapatite scaffolds affects bone regeneration by modulating macrophage polarization and the foreign body response. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 14(18):20693–2070710.1021/acsami.2c02001 ↗
34. Vaishya R, Agarwal AK, Tiwari M, Vaish A, Vijay V, Nigam Y (2018) Medical textiles in orthopedics: an overview. J Clin Orthop Trauma 9S:S26–S3310.1016/j.jcot.2017.10.016 ↗
35. Jacobs CAM, Cramer EEA, Dias AA, Smelt H, Hofmann S, Ito K (2022) “Surface modifications to promote the osteoconductivity of ultra-high-molecular-weight-polyethylene fabrics for a novel biomimetic artificial disc prosthesis: an in vitro study. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 111:1–11
36. Frobin W, Leivseth G, Biggemann M, Brinckmann P (2002) Vertebral height, disc height, posteroanterior displacement and dens-atlas gap in the cervical spine: Precision measurement protocol and normal data. Clin Biomech 17(6):423–43110.1016/S0268-0033(02)00044-X ↗
37. Busscher I, Ploegmakers JJW, Verkerke GJ, Veldhuizen AG (2010) Comparative anatomical dimensions of the complete human and porcine spine. Eur Spine J 19(7):1104–111410.1007/s00586-010-1326-9 ↗
38. Anderst W, Donaldson W, Lee J, Kang J (2016) Cervical spine disc deformation during in vivo three-dimensional head movements. Ann Biomed Eng 44(5):1598–161210.1007/s10439-015-1424-2 ↗