journal article·2025-02-10Open access

Review of 3D Printing of Polyaryletherketone/Apatite Composites for Lattice Structures for Orthopedic Implants

Reshma McMullan, Atefeh Golbang, Kristine Salma-Ancane, Joanna Ward, Krzysztof Rodzen, Adrian R Boyd

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 4

Abstract

Neck and lower back pain, often caused by spinal disorders such as scoliosis and degenerative disc disease, affects over 80% of the global population, with an estimated from 250,000 to 500,000 spinal cord injuries occurring annually according to the WHO. As the demand for spinal procedures continues to rise, advancements in implant materials have become essential. Orthopedic implants play a vital role in restoring mobility and improving the quality of life of patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Metallic implants, such as stainless steel, titanium, and its alloys, are commonly used to make fixation devices for spinal fusion surgery due to their excellent mechanical properties. However, complications such as stress shielding have been recorded. Polymeric materials offer new prospects as an alternative to metal-based materials such as those based on Polyaryletherketone (PEAK). Among the advanced materials used in these implants, PAEK has emerged as the preferred choice due to its exceptional mechanical strength, thermal stability, and chemical resistance. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) offer notable advantages, such as radiolucency and mechanical properties resembling those of natural bone, reducing stress shielding and facilitating postoperative imaging. Although PEEK and PEKK are considered as bioinert, it has been demonstrated that adding bioactive agents such as hydroxyapatite (HA) into the matrix to make composites solves this problem and can help with aiding direct bone apposition. Furthermore, PAEK’s compatibility with 3DP enables the creation of patient-specific implants with intricate geometries, enhancing the surgical outcomes. In addition, the lattice structures of orthopedic implants can alleviate stress shielding, provide an enhanced surface area for the release of bioactive agents (or antimicrobial materials), and eliminate more imaging artifacts compared to that of simple, solid metal implants. PAEK/HA composite implants represent a transformative solution, addressing the psychological, social, and economic burdens of spinal disorders, while enhancing the surgical outcomes. With continuous technological evolution, PAEK/HA composites are poised to play a pivotal role in modern spinal care.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Photopolymerization techniques and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Engineering, Ulster University, York Street, Belfast BT15 1ED, UK

Institute of Biomaterials and Bioengineering, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Technology, Riga Technical University, Paula Valdena, St 3, k-1, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia

Baltic Biomaterials Centre of Excellence (BBCE), Headquarters at Riga Technical University, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia

Funding

Royal Academy of Engineering

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. A Sneak Peek Toward Polyaryletherketone (PAEK) Polymer: A Review
2. Additive manufacturing methods and modelling approaches: A critical review10.1007/s00170-015-7576-2 ↗
3. Substituted hydroxyapatites for biomedical applications: A review10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.03.316 ↗
4. Rodzén, K., Sharma, P.K., McIlhagger, A., Mokhtari, M., Dave, F., Tormey, D., Sherlock, R., Meenan, B.J., and Boyd, A. (2021). The Direct 3D Printing of Functional PEEK/Hydroxyapatite Composites via a Fused Filament Fabrication Approach. Polymers, 13.10.3390/polym13040545 ↗
5. Design of lattice structure for additive manufacturing
6. Design and Optimization of Conforming Lattice Structures10.1109/TVCG.2019.2938946 ↗
7. Epidemiology and risk factors for spine pain10.1016/j.ncl.2007.01.004 ↗
8. Insights in Public Health: Perspectives on Pain in the Low Back and Neck: Global Burden, Epidemiology, and Management
9. Alhowimel, A.S., Alodaibi, F., Alshehri, M.M., Alqahtani, B.A., Alotaibi, M., and Alenazi, A.M. (2021). Prevalence and Risk Factors Associated with Low Back Pain in the Saudi Adult Community: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18.10.3390/ijerph182413288 ↗
10. (2024, February 05). Spinal Implants And Devices Market Size Report. Available online: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/spinal-implants-spinal-devices-market.
11. Trends in lumbar spinal fusion-a literature review10.21037/jss-20-492 ↗
12. A UK-based pilot study of current surgical practice and implant preferences in lumbar fusion surgery10.1097/MD.0000000000011169 ↗
13. (2023, March 11). Bones: Types, Structure, and Function. Available online: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/320444#Bone-cells.
14. The microstructural and biomechanical development of the condylar bone: A review10.1093/ejo/cjt093 ↗
15. Rapid prototyping technology and its application in bone tissue engineering10.1631/jzus.B1600118 ↗
16. (2023, March 11). Spinal Anatomy|Vertebral Column. Available online: https://www.spineuniverse.com/anatomy/vertebral-column.
17. (2023, March 11). Spine Structure & Function: Parts & Segments, Spine Problems, Spine Health. Available online: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/10040-spine-structure-and-function.
18. (2022, October 24). Spinal Surgery-Fusion|Medtronic. Available online: https://www.medtronic.com/us-en/patients/treatments-therapies/considering-back-surgery/spinal-fusion.html.
19. Cervical decompressive laminectomy and lateral mass screw-rod arthrodesis: Surgical experience and analytical review of 4120 consecutive screws10.1080/02688697.2021.1887450 ↗
20. A Review on Biomaterials: Scope, Applications & Human Anatomy Significance
21. Evaluation of Titanium Serum Levels in Patients After Spine Instrumentation: Comparison Between Posterolateral and 360o Spinal Fusion Surgery
22. Sarfraz, S., Mäntynen, P.-H., Laurila, M., Rossi, S., Leikola, J., Kaakinen, M., Suojanen, J., and Reunanen, J. (2022). Comparison of Titanium and PEEK Medical Plastic Implant Materials for Their Bacterial Biofilm Formation Properties. Polymers, 14.10.3390/polym14183862 ↗
23. Ti based biomaterials, the ultimate choice for orthopaedic implants—A review10.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.06.004 ↗
24. Metal artifact correction for x-ray computed tomography using kV and selective MV imaging10.1118/1.4901551 ↗
25. Reducing MRI susceptibility artefacts in implants using additively manufactured porous Ti-6Al-4V structures10.1016/j.actbio.2020.02.038 ↗
26. Suphangul, S., Rokaya, D., Kanchanasobhana, C., Rungsiyakull, P., and Chaijareenont, P. (2022). PEEK Biomaterial in Long-Term Provisional Implant Restorations: A Review. J. Funct. Biomater., 13.10.3390/jfb13020033 ↗
27. Rodzeń, K., McIvor, M.J., Sharma, P.K., Acheson, J.G., McIlhagger, A., Mokhtari, M., McFerran, A., Ward, J., Meenan, B.J., and Boyd, A.R. (2021). The Surface Characterisation of Fused Filament Fabricated (FFF) 3D Printed PEEK/Hydroxyapatite Composites. Polymers, 13.10.3390/polym13183117 ↗
28. Almasi, D., Iqbal, N., Sadeghi, M., Sudin, I., Abdul Kadir, M.R., and Kamarul, T. (2016). Preparation Methods for Improving PEEK’s Bioactivity for Orthopedic and Dental Application: A Review. Int. J. Biomater., 2016.10.1155/2016/8202653 ↗
29. Manzoor, F., Golbang, A., Jindal, S., Dixon, D., McIlhagger, A., Harkin-Jones, E., Crawford, D., and Mancuso, E. (2021). 3D printed PEEK/HA composites for bone tissue engineering applications: Effect of material formulation on mechanical performance and bioactive potential. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 121.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104601 ↗
30. (2022, November 28). PEEK, vs. PEKK: Which High Performance Material Should You Choose?—3Dnatives. Available online: https://www.3dnatives.com/en/peek-vs-pekk-240620214/#!.
31. Zol, S.M., Alauddin, M.S., Said, Z., Ghazali, M.I.M., Lee, H.E., Farid, D.A.M., Zahari, N.A.H., Al-Khadim, A.H.A., and Abdul Aziz, A.H. (2023). Description of Poly(aryl-ether-ketone) Materials (PAEKs), Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) for Application as a Dental Material: A Materials Science Review. Polymers, 15.10.3390/polym15092170 ↗
32. Biomechanical rationale for using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spacers for lumbar interbody fusion-A finite element study10.1097/01.brs.0000250177.84168.ba ↗
33. Outcomes of interbody fusion cages used in 1 and 2-levels anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: Titanium cages versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages
34. (2023, December 04). All You Need to Know About PEEK for 3D Printing—3Dnatives. Available online: https://www.3dnatives.com/en/peek-3d-printing-060420204/#!.
35. Oladapo, B.I., Zahedi, S.A., Ismail, S.O., and Omigbodun, F.T. (2021). 3D printing of PEEK and its composite to increase biointerfaces as a biomedical material—A review. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces, 203.10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.111726 ↗
36. Bioactive composites consisting of PEEK and calcium silicate powders10.1177/0885328208094557 ↗
37. A new strategy for PEEK-based biocomposites to achieve porous surface for bioactivity and adjustable mechanical properties for orthopedic stress matching10.1016/j.compositesa.2023.107909 ↗
38. Substituted hydroxyapatites for bone regeneration: A review of current trends10.1002/jbm.b.33651 ↗
39. Substituted hydroxyapatites for bone repair10.1007/s10856-012-4598-2 ↗
40. Hydroxyapatite: Preparation, Properties and Its Biomedical Applications10.4236/aces.2018.84016 ↗
41. Nanoscale hydroxyapatite particles for bone tissue engineering10.1016/j.actbio.2011.03.019 ↗
42. Hydroxyapatite for Biomedical Applications: A Short Overview10.3390/ceramics4040039 ↗
43. Bone substitutes: A review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management10.1177/2041731418776819 ↗
44. A simple biomimetic method for calcium phosphate coating10.1016/S0257-8972(01)01710-8 ↗
45. Bone graft substitutes10.1016/j.hcl.2012.08.001 ↗
46. Bone grafts, bone substitutes and orthobiologics the bridge between basic science and clinical advancements in fracture healing10.4161/org.23306 ↗
47. Bone Grafts and Biomaterials Substitutes for Bone Defect Repair A Review
48. Raimondi, S., Zambon, A., Ranieri, R., Fraulini, F., Amaretti, A., Rossi, M., and Lusvardi, G. (2022). Investigation on the antimicrobial properties of cerium-doped bioactive glasses. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A, 110.10.1002/jbm.a.37289 ↗
49. Understanding the impact of divalent cation substitution on hydroxyapatite: An in vitro multiparametric study on biocompatibility
50. Sun, C., Zhao, H., Wang, L., Zhang, J., Zheng, J., Yang, Z., Huang, L., Wang, L., Liu, C., and Li, D. (2022). Additive manufactured polyether-ether-ketone composite scaffolds with hydroxyapatite filler and porous structure promoted the integration with soft tissue. Biomater. Adv., 141.10.1016/j.bioadv.2022.213119 ↗
51. Lattice design and 3D-printing of PEEK with Ca10(OH)(PO4)3 and in-vitro bio-composite for bone implant10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.09.175 ↗
52. In Vivo Evaluation of ß-TCP Containing 3D Laser Sintered Poly(ether ether ketone) Composites in Pigs10.1177/0883911508101149 ↗
53. Preparation, characterization, in vitro bioactivity, and cellular responses to a polyetheretherketone bioactive composite containing nanocalcium silicate for bone repair10.1021/am504409q ↗
54. Ma, R., and Tang, T. (2014). Current Strategies to Improve the Bioactivity of PEEK. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 15.10.3390/ijms15045426 ↗
55. Nano-TiO2/PEEK bioactive composite as a bone substitute material: In vitro and in vivo studies
56. Mechanical properties and in vitro response of strontium-containing hydroxyapatite/polyetheretherketone composites10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.016 ↗
57. Polyetheretherketone/nano-fluorohydroxyapatite composite with antimicrobial activity and osseointegration properties10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.085 ↗
58. Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK): An emerging biomaterial for oral implants and dental prostheses10.1016/j.jare.2020.09.004 ↗
59. Synthesis and properties of novel copolymers of poly(ether ketone ketone) and poly(ether ether ketone ketone) containing amide and sulfone linkages10.1177/0954008312457794 ↗
60. Comparison of osteointegration property between PEKK and PEEK: Effects of surface structure and chemistry10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.04.014 ↗
61. Song, C.-H., Choi, J.-W., Jeon, Y.-C., Jeong, C.-M., Lee, S.-H., Kang, E.-S., Yun, M.-J., and Huh, J.-B. (2018). Comparison of the Microtensile Bond Strength of a Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) Tooth Post Cemented with Various Surface Treatments and Various Resin Cements. Materials, 11.10.3390/ma11060916 ↗
62. Buck, E., Li, H., and Cerruti, M. (2020). Surface Modification Strategies to Improve the Osseointegration of Poly(etheretherketone) and Its Composites. Macromol. Biosci., 20.10.1002/mabi.201900271 ↗
63. (2024, December 04). Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (Peek): A Review. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365161148_POLY-ETHER-ETHER-KETONE_PEEK_A_REVIEW.
64. (2024, December 04). Handbook of Polymers—George Wypych—Google Books. Available online: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mYZGEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Wypych+G.+Elsevier%3B+Toronto:+2016.+Handbook+of+polymers.+&ots=HIYbk2J7hv&sig=ytR_Az5Dt5owRDJnIaWN7oJ0Mbs&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false.
65. Cheng, K., Shi, Z., Wang, R., Jiang, X., Xiao, F., and Liu, Y. (2023). 3D printed PEKK bone analogs with internal porosity and surface modification for mandibular reconstruction: An in vivo rabbit model study. Biomater. Adv., 151.10.1016/j.bioadv.2023.213455 ↗
66. 3D printing of PEEK–cHAp scaffold for medical bone implant10.1007/s42242-020-00098-0 ↗
67. Yang, F., Lin, F., Song, C., Zhou, C., Jin, Z., and Xu, W. (2016, January 25–27). PBench: A Benchmark Suite for Characterizing 3D Printing Prefabrication. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Workload Characterization (IISWC), Providence, RI, USA.10.1109/IISWC.2016.7581270 ↗
68. Stimuli-responsive biomaterials: Smart avenue toward 4D bioprinting10.1080/07388551.2023.2213398 ↗
69. Viral and non-viral gene therapy using 3D (bio)printing10.1002/jgm.3458 ↗
70. Overview of 3D additive manufacturing (AM) and corresponding AM composites10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.106114 ↗
71. 3D printing and bioprinting in urology10.36922/ijb.0969 ↗
72. Mechanical characterization of parts fabricated using fused deposition modeling10.1108/13552540310489631 ↗
73. Baek, I., Kwon, O., Lim, C.M., Park, K.Y., and Bae, C.J. (2022). 3D PEEK Objects Fabricated by Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF). Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15030898 ↗
74. Evolution of 3d printing technology in fabrication of microfluidic devices and biological applications: A comprehensive review10.1177/25165984241237357 ↗
75. 3D printing—A review of processes, materials and applications in industry 4.010.1016/j.susoc.2021.09.004 ↗
76. A short review on 3D printing methods, process parameters and materials10.1016/j.matpr.2020.10.225 ↗
77. Ahmad, M.N., and Yahya, A. (2023). Effects of 3D Printing Parameters on Mechanical Properties of ABS Samples. Designs, 7.10.20944/preprints202310.0656.v1 ↗
78. (2025, January 26). 3D Printing Profile and 3D Printing Parameters: How to Choose Printing Settings to Print a Part|Roboze. Available online: https://www.roboze.com/en/resources/3d-printing-profile-and-3d-printing-parameters-how-to-choose-printing-settings-to-print-a-part.html.
79. Printing parameters and materials affecting mechanical properties of FDM-3D printed Parts: Perspective and prospects10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.003 ↗
80. (2025, January 26). Additive Manufacturing Process (3D Printing): ‘A Critical Review of Techniques, Applications & Future Scope’. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364997098_Additive_Manufacturing_Process_3D_Printing_A_Critical_Review_of_Techniques_Applications_Future_Scope.
81. A review on the fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing: Filament processing, materials, and printing parameters10.1515/eng-2021-0063 ↗
82. (2025, January 26). Optimising 3D Printing Parameters for Success: Tips and Best Practices. Available online: https://www.objective3d.com.au/resource/blog/3d-printing-parameters-for-success-tips-and-best-practices/.
83. The effect of six key process control parameters on the surface roughness, dimensional accuracy, and porosity in material extrusion 3D printing of polylactic acid: Prediction models and optimization supported by robust design analysis
84. The effects of PLA color on material properties of 3-D printed components
85. Processing and biocompatibility evaluation of laser processed porous titanium10.1016/j.actbio.2007.05.009 ↗
86. Pan, C.-T., Lin, C.-H., Huang, Y.-K., Jang, J.S.C., Lin, H.-K., Kuo, C.-N., Lin, D.-Y., and Huang, J.C. (2021). Design of Customize Interbody Fusion Cages of Ti64ELI with Gradient Porosity by Selective Laser Melting Process. Micromachines, 12.10.3390/mi12030307 ↗
87. Porous scaffolds for bone regeneration10.1016/j.jsamd.2020.01.007 ↗
88. Porous scaffold design for tissue engineering10.1038/nmat1421 ↗
89. (2024, December 04). Home|Curiteva InspireTM Porous PEEK HA Fuse Technology. Available online: https://curiteva.com/.
90. Implant surface characteristics and their effect on osseointegration10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.171 ↗
91. (2025, January 27). newdim3d.ca—Elevated Design & Creation. Available online: https://www.newdim3d.ca/.
92. Singh, A.B. (2024). Transforming Healthcare: A Review of Additive Manufacturing Applications in the Healthcare Sector. Eng. Proc., 72.10.3390/engproc2024072002 ↗
93. Challenges in the design and regulatory approval of 3D-printed surgical implants: A two-case series10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30067-6 ↗
94. (2016). Medical Devices (Standard No. ISO 13485). Available online: https://www.iso.org/iso-13485-medical-devices.html.
95. Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) 3D printing Special Interest Group (SIG): Guidelines for medical 3D printing and appropriateness for clinical scenarios10.1186/s41205-018-0030-y ↗
96. 3D Printed Medical Devices: Regulatory Standards and Technological Advancements in the USA, Canada and Singapore-A Cross-National Study10.5530/ijpi.14.3.99 ↗
97. Regulatory Considerations in the Design and Manufacturing of Implantable 3D-Printed Medical Devices10.1111/cts.12315 ↗
98. Liverani, E., Rogati, G., Pagani, S., Brogini, S., Fortunato, A., and Caravaggi, P. (2021). Mechanical interaction between additive-manufactured metal lattice structures and bone in compression: Implications for stress shielding of orthopaedic implants. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 121.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104608 ↗
99. Fully porous 3D printed titanium femoral stem to reduce stress-shielding following total hip arthroplasty10.1002/jor.23445 ↗
100. The concept of osseointegration and bone matrix expression10.1177/10454411910020010601 ↗