Abstract
Lumbar interbody fusion is an established surgical technique for a variety of conditions affecting the lumbar spine. A large number of interbody fusion devices made of differing materials are now available for use. Approaches for interbody fusion include anterior lumbar interbody fusion, oblique lumbar interbody fusion, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, axial lumbar interbody fusion, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. This chapter discusses the biomechanics of lumbar interbody fusion devices and approaches and the clinical rationale and the clinical results of each approach. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are compared and contrasted. The importance of an appropriate preoperative assessment to determine the best approach for interbody fusion is emphasized, taking into account the condition being treated, sagittal balance, bone quality, and contraindications to a specific approach. The best approach to lumbar interbody fusion by indication and surgical level(s) is discussed.
References
Ahmadian A, Verma S, Mundis G et al (2013) Minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas interbody fusion for L4-5 spondylolisthesis: clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine 19:314–320
Ahmadian A, Bach K, Bolinger B et al (2015) Stand-alone minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion: multicenter clinical outcomes. J Clin Neurosci 22: 740–746
Akesen B, Wu C, Mehbod A, Transfeldt E (2008) Biomechanical evaluation of paracoccygeal transsacral fixation. J Spinal Disord Tech 21:39–44
Allain J, Delecrin J, Beaurain J et al (2014) Stand-alone ALIF with integrated intracorporeal anchoring plates in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disc disease: a prospective study of 65 cases. Eur Spine J 23: 2136–2143
Ames C, Acosta F, Chi J et al (2005) Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels. Spine 30:E562–E566
Anand N, Baron E, Khandehroo B, Kahwaty S (2013) Long-term 2- to 5-year clinical and functional outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for adult scoliosis. Spine 38:1566–1575
Anderson D, Sayadipour A, Shelby K et al (2011) Anterior interbody arthrodesis with percutaneous posteror pedicle fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 20:1323–1330
Arnold P, Anderson K, McGuire R (2012) The lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar and thoracic spine: a review. Surg Neurol Int 3:S198–S215
Bagby G (1988) Arthrodesis by the distraction-compression method using a stainless steel implant. Orthopaedics 11:931–934
Barnes B, Rodts G, Mclaughlin M, Haid R (2001) Threaded cortical bone dowels for lumbar interbody fusion: over 1-year mean follow-up in 28 patients. J Neurosurg Spine 95:1–4
Barnes B, Rodts G, Haid R et al (2002) Allograft implants for posterior lumbar interbody fusion: results comparing cylindrical dowels and impacted wedges. Neurosurgery 51:1191–1198
Beaubien B, Derincek A, Lew W et al (2005) In vitro, biomechanical comparison of an anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anteriorly placed, low-profile lumbar plate and posteriorly placed pedicle screws or translaminar screws. Spine 30:1846–1851
Berjano P, Cecchinato R, Sinigaglia A et al (2015) Anterior column realignment from a lateral approach for the treatment of severe sagittal imbalance: a retrospective radiographic study. Eur Spine J 24(3):433–438
Bevevino A, Kang D, Lehman R et al (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion rates performed without posterolateral fusion. J Clin Neurosci 21: 1686–1690
Bohinski R, Jain V, Tobler W (2010) Presacral retroperitoneal approach to axial lumbar interbody fusion: a new, minimally invasive technique at L5-S1: clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates in 50 patients at 1-year follow-up. SAS J 4:54–62
Bradley D, Hisey M, Verma-Kurvari S, Ohnmeiss D (2012) Minimally invasive trans-sacral approach to L5-S1 interbody fusion: preliminary results from 1 center and review of the literature. Int J Spine Surg 6:110–114
Brodke D, Dick J, Kunz D et al (1997) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A biomechanical comparison, including a new threaded cage. Spine 22:26–31
Burkus J, Heim S, Gornet M, Zdeblick T (2003) Is INFUSE bone graft superior to autograft bone? An integrated analysis of clinical trials using the LT-CAGE lumbar tapered fusion device. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:113–122
Burkus J, Gornet M, Schuler T et al (2009) Six-year outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody arthrodesis with use of interbody fusion cages and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. J Bone Joint Surg 91:1181–1189
Chen S, Lin S, Tsai W et al (2012) Biomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion after decompressive surgery – a finite element analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 13:72
Chen S, Chiang M, Lin J et al (2013) Biomechanical comparison of three stand-alone lumbar cages – a three-dimensional finite element analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 14:281
Chitnavis B, Barbagallo G, Selway R et al (2001) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for revision disc surgery: review of 50 cases in which carbon fibre cages were implanted. J Neurosurg Spine 95:190–195
Cloward R (1953) The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs by vertebral body fusion. J Neurosurg 10:154–168
Costanzo G, Zoccali C, Maykowski P et al (2014) The role of minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion in sagittal balance correction and spinal deformity. Eur Spine J 23:S699–S704
Cunningham BW, Polly DW Jr (2002) The use of interbody cage devices for spinal deformity: a biomechanical perspective. Clin Orthop Relat Res 394:73–83
Derby R, Howard M, Grant J et al (1999) The ability of pressure-controlled discography to predict surgical and nonsurgical outcomes. Spine 24:364–371
Dorward I, Lenke L, Bridwell K et al (2013) Transforaminal versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion in long deformity constructs. Spine 38:E755–E762
Erkan S, Wu C, Mehbod A et al (2009) Biomechanical evaluation of a new AxiaLIF technique for two-level lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 18:807–814
Fan S, Hu Z, Fang X et al (2010) Comparison of paraspinal muscle injury in one-level lumbar posterior inter-body fusion: modified minimally invasive and traditional open approaches. Orthop Surg 2:194–200
Farcy J, Rawlins B, Glassman S (1992) Technique and results of fixation to the sacrum with iliosacral screws. Spine 17:S190–S195
Fogel G, Parikh R, Ryu S, Turner A (2014) Biomechanics of lateral lumbar interbody fusion constructs with lateral and posterior plate fixation. J Neurosurg Spine 20:291–297
Freudenberger C, Lindley E, Beard D et al (2009) Posterior versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior tension band plating: retrospective analysis. Orthopaedics 32:492–496
Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P et al (2002) Chronic low back pain and fusion: a comparison of three surgical techniques. Spine 27:1131–1141
Gerber M, Crawford N, Chamberlain R et al (2006) Biomechanical assessment of anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anterior lumbosacral fixation screw-plate: comparison to stand-along anterior lumbar interbody fusion and anterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screws in an unstable human cadaver model. Spine 31:762–768
Giang G, Mobbs R, Phan S et al (2017) Evaluating outcomes of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review. World Neurosurg 104:259–271
Glassman S, Gornet M, Branch C et al (2006) MOS short form 36 and Oswestry Disability Index outcomes in lumbar fusion: a multicenter experience. Spine J 6:21–26
Goldstein C, Macwan K, Sundarajan K, Rampersaud R (2016) Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine 24:416–427
Gonzalez-Blohm S, Doulgeris J, Aghayev K et al (2014) In vitro evaluation of a lateral expandable cage and its comparison with a static device for lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical investigation. J Neurosurg Spine 20:387–395
Gornet M, Burkus J, Dryer R, Peloza J (2011) Lumbar disc arthroplasty with Maverick disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion. Spine 36:E1600–E1611
Grant J, Oxland T, Dvorak M, Fisher C (2002) The effects of bone density and disc degeneration on the structural property distributions in the lower lumbar vertebral endplates. J Orthop Res 20:1115–1120
Hackenberg L, Halm H, Bullmann V et al (2005) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J 14:551–558
Haid R, Branch C, Alexander J, Burkus J (2004) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2 with cylindrical interbody cages. Spine J 4:527–539
Hioki A, Miyamoto K, Kodama H et al (2005) Two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease: improved clinical outcome with restoration of lumbar lordosis. Spine J 5:600–607
Hoff E, Strube P, Pumberger M et al (2016) ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial. Eur Spine J 25:1558–1566
Hsieh P, Koski T, O’Shaughnessy B et al (2007) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance. J Neurosurg Spine 7:379–386
Hsieh C, Lee H, Oh H et al (2017) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for multiple-level isthmic spondylolisthesis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 158:49–52
Humphreys C, Hodges S, Patwardhan A et al (2001) Comparison of posterior and transforaminal approaches to lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 26: 567–571
Jiang S, Chen J, Jiang L (2012) Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:1259–1266
Joseph J, Smith B, La Marca F, Park P et al (2015) Comparison of complication rates of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 39:E4
Kaleli N, Sarac D, Külünk S et al (2018) Effect of different restorative crown and customized abutment materials on stress distribution in single implants and peripheral bone: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent 119(3):437–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.03.008
Kanayama M, Cunningham B, Haggerty C et al (2000) In vitro biomechanical investigation of the stability and stress-shielding effect of lumbar interned fusion devices. J Neurosurg Spine 93:259–265
Kettler A, Wilke H, Diets R et al (2000) Stabilizing effect of posterior lumbar interbody fusion cages before and after cyclic loading. J Neurosurg 92:87–92
Khan N, Clark A, Lee S et al (2015) Surgical outcomes for minimally invasive vs open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery 77:847–874
Kim J, Kim D, Lee S et al (2010) Comparison study of the instrumented circumferential fusion with instrumented anterior lumbar interbody fusion as a surgical procedure for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg 73:565–571
Kim C, Harris J, Muzumdar A et al (2017) The effect of anterior longitudinal ligament resection on lordosis correction during minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion: biomechanical and radiographic feasibility of an integrated spacer/plate interbody reconstruction device. Clin Biomech 43:102–108
Kornblum M, Turner A, Cornwall G et al (2013) Biomechanical evaluation of stand-alone lumbar polyether-ether-ketone interbody cage with integrated screws. Spine J 13:77–84
Kostuik J, Hall B (1983) Spinal fusions to the sacrum in adults with scoliosis. Spine 8:489–500
Kuslich S, Ulstrom C, Griffith S, Ahern J, Dowdle J (1998) The Baby and Kuslich method of lumbar interbody fusion. History, techniques, and 2-year follow-up results of a United States prospective, multicentre trial. Spine 23:1267–1279
Lammli J, Whitaker C, Moskowitz A et al (2014) Stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. Spine 15:E894–E901
Lauber S, Schulte T, Liljenqvist U et al (2006) Clinical and radiologic 2–4 year results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis grades 1 and 2. Spine 15:1693–1698
Laws C, Coughlin D, Lotz J et al (2012) Direct lateral approach to lumbar fusion is a biomechanically equivalent alternative to the anterior approach. Spine 37:819–825
Ledet E, Tymson M, Salerno S et al (2005) A biomechanical evaluation of a novel lumbosacral axial fixation device. J Biomech Eng 127:929–933
Lee YC, Zotti MGT, Osti OL (2016) Operative management of lumbar degenerative disc disease. Asian Spine J 10(4):801–819
Lee C, Yoon K, Ha S (2017a) Which approach is advantageous to preventing development of adjacent segment disease? Comparative analysis of 3 different lumbar interbody fusion techniques (ALIF, LLIF, PLIF) in L4-5 spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg 105:612–622
Lee N, Kim K, Yi S et al (2017b) Comparison of outcomes of anterior, posterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery at a single level with degenerative spinal disease. World Neurosurg 101:216–226
Lestini W, Fulghum F, Whitehurst L (1994) Lumbar spinal fusion: advantages of posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Surg Technol Int 3:577–590
Li J, Phan K, Mobbs R (2017) Oblique lumbar interbody fusion: technical aspects, operative outcomes, and complications. World Neurosurg 98:113–123
Lin J, Iundusi R, Tarantino U, Moon M (2010) Intravertebral plate and cage system via lateral trajectory for lumbar interbody fusion – a novel fixation device. Spine J 10:86S
Lowe T, Tahernia D (2002) Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 394:64–72
Lykissas M, Aichmair A, Hughes A et al (2014) Nerve injury after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 919 treated levels with identification of risk factors. Spine J 14:749–758
Madan S, Boeree N (2003) Comparison of instrumented anterior interbody fusion with instrumented circumferential fusion. Eur Spine J 12:567–575
Malham G, Parker R, Goss B et al (2015) Clinical results and limitations of indirect decompression in spinal stenosis with laterally implanted interbody cages: results from a prospective cohort study. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 3):339–345
Marotta N, Cosar M, Pimenta L, Khoo LT (2006) A novel minimally invasive presacral approach and instrumentation technique for anterior L5-S1 intervertebral discectomy and fusion: technical description and case presentations. Neurosurg Focus 20:E9
Mayer M (1997) A new microsurgical technique for minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 22:691–700
McAfee P, DeVine J, Chaput C et al (2005) The indications for interbody fusion cages in the treatment of spondylolisthesis: analysis of 120 cases. Spine 30:S60–S65
Mehren C, Mayer M, Zandanell C et al (2016) The oblique anterolateral approach to the lumbar spine provides access to the lumbar spine with few early complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474:2020–2027
Melgar M, Tobler W, Ernst R et al (2014) Segmental and global lordosis changes with two-level axial lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation. Int J Spine Surg 8:10
Melikian R, Yoon S, Kim J et al (2016) Sagittal plane correction using the lateral transpsoas approach: a biomechanical study on the effect of cage angle and surgical technique on segmental lordosis. Spine 41:E1016–E1021
Mobbs R, Maharaj M, Rao P (2014) Clinical outcomes and fusion rates following anterior lumbar interbody fusion with bone graft substitute i-FACTOR, an anorganic bone matrix/P-15 composite. J Neurosurg Spine 21:867–876
Molinari R, Gerlinger T (2001) Functional outcomes of instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion in active-duty US servicemen: a comparison with nonoperative management. Spine J 1:215–224
Molloy S, Butler J, Benton A et al (2016) A new extensile anterolateral retroperitoneal approach for lumbar interbody fusion from L1 to S1: a prospective series with clinical outcomes. Spine J 16:786–791
Ohtori S, Koshi T, Yamashita M et al (2011) Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of selected patients with discogenic low back pain: a small-sized randomized trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36(5):347–354
Oxland T, Hoffer Z, Nydegger T et al (2000) A comparative biomechanical investigation of anterior lumbar interbody cages: central and bilateral approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82A:383–393
Ozgur B, Aryan H, Pimenta L et al (2006) Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 6:435–443
Park J, Kim Y, Hong H et al (2005) Comparison between posterior and transforaminal approaches for lumbar interbody fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 37:340–344
Phan K, Rao P, Kam A, Mobbs R (2015a) Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 24:1017–1030
Phan K, Rao P, Scherman D et al (2015b) Lateral lumbar interbody fusion for sagittal balance correction and spinal deformity. J Clin Neurosci 22:1714–1721
Phan K, Thayaparan G, Mobbs R (2015c) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Neurosurg 29:705–711
Phillips F, Cunningham B, Carandang G et al (2004) Effect of supplemental translaminar facet screw fiction on the stability of stand-along anterior lumbar interned fusion cages under physiologic compressive preloads. Spine 29:1731–1736
Phillips F, Isaacs R, Rodgers W et al (2013) Adult degenerative scoliosis treated with XLIF. Spine 38:1853–1861
Rao P, Loganathan A, Yeung V, Mobbs R (2015) Outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery based on indication: a prospective study. Neurosurgery 76:7–24
Rathonyi G, Oxland T, Jost B et al (1998) The role of supplementary translaminar screws in anterior lumbar interbody fixation: a biomechanical study. Eur Spine J 7:400–407
Reis M, Reyes P, Altun I et al (2016) Biomechanical evaluation of lateral lumbar interbody fusion with secondary augmentation. J Neurosurg Spine 25:720–726
Rodgers B, Gerber E, Patterson J (2010) Intraoperative and early postoperative complications in extreme lateral interbody fusion. Spine 36:26–33
Rosenberg W, Mummaneni P (2001) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: technique, complications, and early results. Neurosurgery 48:569–574
Rothenfluh D, Mueller DA, Rothenfluh E, Min K (2015) Pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch predisposes to adjacent segment disease after lumbar spinal fusion. Eur Spine J 24(6):1251–1258
Saigal R, Mundis G, Eastlack R et al (2016) Anterior column realignment (ACR) in adult sagittal deformity correction. Spine 41:S66–S73
Sakeb N, Ahsan K (2013) Comparison of the early results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic lumbar instability. Indian J Orthop 47:255–263
Sasso R, Kitchel S, Dawson E (2004) A prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using a titanium cylindrical threaded fusion device. Spine 29:113–122
Saville P, Kadam A, Smith H, Arlet V (2016) Anterior hyperlordotic cages: early experience and radiographic results. J Neurosurg Spine 25:713–719
Schroeder G, Kepler C, Vaccaro A (2015) Axial interbody arthrodesis of the L5-S1 segment: a systematic review of the literature. J Neurosurg Spine 23:314–319
Sears W (2005a) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: restoration of sagittal balance using insert-and-rotate interbody spacers. Spine J 5:161–169
Sears W (2005b) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: restoration of sagittal balance using insert-and-rotate interbody spacers. Spine J 5:170–179
Siepe C, Stosch-Wiechert K, Heider F et al (2015) Anterior stand-alone fusion revisited: a prospective clinical, X-ray and CT investigation. Eur Spine J 24:838–851
Slucky A, Brodke D, Bachus K et al (2006) Less invasive posterior fixation method following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical analysis. Spine J 6:78–85
Sorian-Baron H, Newcomb A, Crawford N et al (2017) Biomechanical effects of an oblique lumbar PEEK cage and posterior augmentation. Spine J 17(10):S185–S186
Stauffer R, Coventry M (1972) Anterior interbody lumbar spine fusion. J Bone Joint Surg 54-A:756–768
Steffee A, Sitkowski D (1988) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion and plates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 227:99–102
Tempel Z, Gandhoke G, Bonfield C et al (2014) Radiographic and clinical outcomes following combined lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior segmental stabilization in patients with adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus 36:E11
Tsantrizos A, Andreou A, Aebi M, Steffen T (2000) Biomechanical stability of five standalone anterior lumbar interbody fusion constructs. Eur Spine J 9:14–22
Vadapalli S, Sairyo K, Goel V et al (2006) Biomechanical rationale for using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spacers for lumbar interbody fusion – a finite element study. Spine 31:E992–E998
Wang G, Han D, Cao Z et al (2017) Outcomes of autograft alone versus PEEK+ autograft interbody fusion in the treatment of adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 155:1–6
Weatherley C, Pricket C, O’Brien J (1986) Discogenic pain persisting despite solid posterior fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Br 68:142–143
Xiao Z, Wang L, Gong H, Zhu D (2012) Biomechanical evaluation of three surgical scenarios of posterior lumbar interbody fusion by finite element analysis. Biomech Eng Online 11:31
Yeager M, Dupre D, Cook D et al (2015) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with integrated fixation and adjunctive posterior stabilization: a comparative biomechanical analysis. Clin Biomech 30:769–774
Youssef J, McAfee P, Patty C et al (2010) Minimally invasive surgery: lateral approach interbody fusion. Spine 35:S302–S311
Zeilstra D, Staartjes V, Schroder M et al (2017) Minimally invasive transaxial lumbosacral interbody fusion: a ten year single-centre experience. Int Orthop 41:113–119
Zhang Q, Yuan Z, Zhou M et al (2014) A comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 15:367
Zigler J, Delamarter R (2013) Does 360deg lumbar spinal fusion improve long-term clinical outcomes after failure of conservative treatment in patients with functionally disabling single-level degenerative lumbar disc disease? Results of 5-year follow-up in 75 postoperative patients. Int J Spine Surg 7:E1–E7
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
McEntee, L., Zotti, M.G. (2019). Lumbar Interbody Fusion Devices and Approaches: When to Use What. In: Cheng, B. (eds) Handbook of Spine Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_85-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33037-2_85-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33037-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences