Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Human bone ingrowth into a porous tantalum acetabular cup

1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE
3 Department of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece

Topical Section: Biological and biomimetic materials

Porous Tantalum is increasingly used as a structural scaffold in orthopaedic applications. Information on the mechanisms of human bone ingrowth into trabecular metal implants is rather limited. In this work we have studied, qualitatively, human bone ingrowth into a retrieved porous tantalum monoblock acetabular cup using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray analysis. According to the results and taking into account the short operational life (4 years) of the implant, bone ingrowth on the acetabular cup took place in the first two-rows of porous tantalum cells to an estimated depth of 1.5 to 2 mm. The bone material, grown inside the first raw of cells, had almost identical composition with the attached bone on the cup surface, as verified by the same Ca:P ratio. Bone ingrowth has been a gradual process starting with Ca deposition on the tantalum struts, followed by bone formation into the tantalum cells, with gradual densification of the bone tissue into hydroxyapatite. A critical step in this process has been the attachment of bone material to the tantalum struts following the topology of the porous tantalum scaffold. These results provide insight to the human bone ingrowth process into porous tantalum implants.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

References

1. Engh CA, Hopper RH, Engh CA (2004) Long-term porous-coated survivorship using spikes, screws and press fitting for initial fixation. J Arthroplasty 19: 54–60.

2. Engh CA, Zettl-Schaffer KF, Kukita Y, et al. (1993) Histological and radiographic assessment of well-functioning porous-coated acetabular componenents. A human postmortem retrieval study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75: 814–824.    

3. Roy M, Balla VK, Bose S, et al. (2010) Comparison of tantalum and hydroxyapatite coatings on tantalum for applications in load bearing implants. Adv Eng Mater 12: B637–B641.    

4. Udomkiat P, Dorr LD, Wan Z (2002) Cementless hemispheric porous-coated sockets implanted with press-fit technique without screws: average ten-year follow up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84: 1195–1200.    

5. Pidhorz LE, Urban RM, Jacobs JJ (1993) A quantitative study of bone and soft tissues in cementless porous-coated acetabular components retrieved at autopsy. J Arthroplasty 8: 213–225.    

6. Levine B (2008) A new era in porous metals: applications in orthopedics. Adv Eng Mater 10: 788–792.    

7. Eisenbarth E (2007) Biomaterials for tissue engineering. Adv Eng Mater 9: 1051–1060.    

8. Chen CJ, Zhang M (2012) Fabrication methods of porous tantalum metal implants for use as biomaterials. Adv Mater Res 476–478: 2063–2066.

9. Mediaswanti K, Wen C, Ivanova EC, et al. (2013) A review on bioactive porous metallic biomaterials. J Biomim Biomater Tissue Eng 18: 1–8.    

10. Cristea D, Ghiuta I, Muntenau D (2015) Tantalum based materials for implants and prostheses applications. B Transilvania Univ Brasov Eng Sci Ser I 8: 151–158.

11. Bobyn JD, Stackpool G, Hacking SA, et al. (1999) Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81: 907–914.    

12. Bobyn JD, Toh KK, Hacking SA, et al. (1999) Tissue response to porous tantalum acetabular cups: a canine model. J Arthroplasty 14: 347–354.    

13. Malizos KN, Bargiotas K, Papatheodorou L, et al. (2008) Survivorship of monoblock trabecular metal cups on primary THA: midterm results. Clin Orthop Relat R 466: 159–166.    

14. Xenakis T, Macheras G, Stafilas K, et al. (2009) Multicenter use of a porous tantalum monoblock acetabular component. Int Orthop 33: 911–916.    

15. Macheras GA, Papagelopoulos PJ, Kateros K, et al. (2006) Radiological evaluation of the metal-bone interface of a porous tantalum monoblock acetabular component. Bone Joint J 88: 304–309.

16. Gruen TA, Poggie RA, Lewallen DG, et al. (2005) Radiographic evaluation of a monoblock acetabular component: a multilayer study with 2- to 5-year results. J Arthroplasty 20: 369–378.    

17. D'Angelo F, Murena L, Campagnolo M, et al. (2008) Analysis of bone ingrowth on a tantalum cup. Indian J Orthop 42: 275–278.    

18. Hanzlik JA, Day JS (2013) Bone ingrowth in well-fixed porous tantalum implants. J Arthroplasty 28: 922–927.    

19. Hanzlik JA, Day JS, Rimnac CM, et al. (2015) Is there a difference in bone ingrowth in modular versus monoblock porous tantalum tibial trays? J Arthroplasty 30: 1073–1078.    

20. Levine BR, Sporer S, Poggie RA, et al. (2006) Experimental and clinical performance of porous tantalum in orthopedic surgery. Biomaterials 27: 4671–4681.    

21. Paganias CG, Tsakotos GA, Koutsostahis SD, et al. (2012) Osseous integration in porous tantalum implants. Indian J Orthop 46: 505–513.    

22. Paganias CG, Tsakotos GA, Koutsostahis SD, et al. (2014) The process of porous tantalum implants osseous integration: a review. Am Med J 5: 63–72.

Copyright Info: © 2017, Gregory N. Haidemenopoulos, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline
Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved