Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Test protocols for evaluation of spinal implants.

Vijay K Goel1, Manohar M Panjabi, Avinash G Patwardhan

  • 1Department of Bioengineering, 5051 C Nitschke Hall, College of Engineering, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43606, USA. vijay.goel@utoledo.edu

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume
|April 6, 2006
PubMed
Summary

Rigorous testing ensures medical device safety and efficacy. Standardized protocols are needed to compare spinal implants, considering biomechanical and clinical performance.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Biomechanical Effects of Cage Position in Full-endoscopic Trans-Kambin's Triangle Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis.

Neurologia medico-chirurgica·2025
Same author

Design of Peptide Inhibitors Using Expression Tags: Structure of the Complex of Phosphopantetheine Adenylyltransferase with 17-Residue Expression-Tag Peptide and Citric Acid at 2.10 Å Resolution.

Biochemistry·2025
Same author

Protein-tags and their fragments as potent inhibitors of enzymes: Structure of the ternary complex of phosphopantetheine adenylyltransferase from Enterobacter spp. with tag-peptides and phosphonoacetic acid at 2.20 Å resolution.

Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society·2025
Same author

Ultrafine-Grained Materials With Antibacterial Properties: A Novel Approach to Reducing Spinal Implant-Associated Infections.

JOR spine·2025
Same author

Shear resistance of a posterior lumbar total joint replacement prosthesis.

The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society·2025
Same author

Adherence Monitor for Measurement of Removable Cast Walker Wear-Time: Multiple Sensors and Predictive Analytics Improve Accuracy.

Journal of diabetes science and technology·2024

Area of Science:

  • Orthopaedic Biomechanics
  • Medical Device Testing
  • Spinal Implant Evaluation

Background:

  • Implantable medical devices require extensive pre-implantation testing for safety and efficacy.
  • Current testing protocols for spinal devices have evolved over three decades, reflecting advancements in orthopaedic biomechanics.
  • Innovations in spinal implants, such as motion-preservation devices, necessitate dynamic adaptation of testing methodologies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline the comprehensive testing protocols for implantable spinal devices.
  • To emphasize the importance of evaluating biomechanical and clinical performance.
  • To advocate for standardized, laboratory-independent test protocols for spinal implants.

Main Methods:

  • Biocompatibility testing as a foundational step.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Finite element modeling for design optimization and performance prediction.
  • Mechanical testing using human cadaveric spines to assess biomechanical characteristics (motion, load-sharing, intradiscal pressure).
  • In situ evaluation using animal models to assess structure, function, histology, and biomechanics.
  • Supplementation of cadaveric data with finite element analysis.

    • Main Results:

    • A multi-step testing approach is essential, integrating material selection, biomechanical evaluation, and in vivo assessment.
    • Finite element modeling and cadaveric testing provide complementary data for device performance prediction.
    • No single test can fully ascertain all device characteristics; data interpretation requires context due to inherent test limitations.

    Conclusions:

    • Current testing protocols are a product of extensive research but must evolve with technological advancements.
    • Standardized testing protocols are crucial for systematic, laboratory-independent comparison of diverse spinal devices.
    • Convergence toward standardized protocols will facilitate informed decision-making for available and developing spinal implants.