Implant Design and Cervical Spinal Biomechanics and Neurorehabilitation: A Finite Element Investigation.

Introduction The cervical spine, pivotal for mobility and overall body function, can be affected by cervical spondylosis, a major contributor to neural disorders. Prevalent in both general and military populations, especially among pilots, cervical spondylosis induces pain and limits spinal capabilities. Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) surgery, proposed by Cloward in the 1950s, is a promising solution for restoring natural cervical curvature. The study objective was to investigate the impacts of ACDF implant design on postsurgical cervical biomechanics and neurorehabilitation outcomes by utilizing a biofield head-neck finite element (FE) platform that can facilitate scenario-specific perturbations of neck muscle activations. This study addresses the critical need to enhance computational models, specifically FE modeling, for ACDF implant design. Materials and Methods We utilized a validated head-neck FE model to investigate spine–implant biomechanical interactions. An S-shaped dynamic cage incorporating titanium (Ti) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) materials was modeled at the C4/C5 level. The loading conditions were carefully designed to mimic helmet-to-helmet impact in American football, providing a realistic and challenging scenario. The analysis included intervertebral joint motion, disk pressure, and implant von Mises stress. Results The PEEK implant demonstrated an increased motion in flexion and lateral bending at the contiguous spinal (C4/C5) level. In flexion, the Ti implant showed a modest 5% difference under 0% activation conditions, while PEEK exhibited a more substantial 14% difference. In bending, PEEK showed a 24% difference under 0% activation conditions, contrasting with Ti's 17%. The inclusion of the head resulted in an average increase of 18% in neck angle and 14% in C4/C5 angle. Disk pressure was influenced by implant material, muscle activation level, and the presence of the head. Polyetheretherketone exhibited lower stress values at all intervertebral disc levels, with a significant effect at the C6/C7 levels. Muscle activation level significantly influenced disk stress at all levels, with higher activation yielding higher stress. Titanium implant consistently showed higher disk stress values than PEEK, with an orders-of-magnitude difference in von Mises stress. Excluding the head significantly affected disk and implant stress, emphasizing its importance in accurate implant performance simulation. Conclusions This study emphasized the use of a biofidelic head-neck model to assess ACDF implant designs. Our results indicated that including neck muscles and head structures improves biomechanical outcome measures. Furthermore, unlike Ti implants, our findings showed that PEEK implants maintain neck motion at the affected level and reduce disk stresses. Practitioners can use this information to enhance postsurgery outcomes and reduce the likelihood of secondary surgeries. Therefore, this study makes an important contribution to computational biomechanics and implant design domains by advancing computational modeling and theoretical knowledge on ACDF–spine interaction dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]