Enhanced bone healing around nanohydroxyapatite-coated polyetheretherketone implants: An experimental study in rabbit bone

Journal of Biomaterials Applications

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 737-747

  Barkarmo, S ^a   Andersson, M ^b   Currie, F ^c   Kjellin, P ^c   Jimbo, R ^d   Johansson, C B ^a   Stenport, V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c Promimic AB   (Sweden)

^d MALMÖ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

hydroxyapatite; in vivo; nanotopography; osseointegration; Polyetheretherketone

Indexed keywords

HYDROXYAPATITE; IMPLANTS (SURGICAL); NANOCRYSTALLINE MATERIALS; NANOCRYSTALS; POLYETHER ETHER KETONES; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; TISSUE REGENERATION;

BONE-TO-IMPLANT CONTACT; FOREIGN BODY GIANT CELLS; HISTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS; IN-VIVO; NANOTOPOGRAPHIES; OPTICAL INTERFEROMETRY; OSSEOINTEGRATION; QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS;

BONE;

HYDROXYAPATITE; NANOCOATING; NANOHYDROXYAPATITE; POLYETHERETHERKETONE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; BIOMATERIAL; KETONE; MACROGOL DERIVATIVE; NANOMATERIAL; NANOPARTICLE;

ADULT; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BONE IMPLANT; BONE REGENERATION; BONE TO IMPLANT CONTACT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE REMOVAL; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL TEST; FEMALE; FEMUR; FRACTURE HEALING; GIANT CELL; INFLAMMATION; INTERFEROMETRY; MORPHOMETRICS; NONHUMAN; OPTICAL INTERFEROMETRY; OSSIFICATION; PHYSICAL PARAMETERS; POLYETHERETHERKETONE IMPLANT; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RABBIT MODEL; REMOVAL TORQUE TEST; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE; SURFACE PROPERTY; TIBIA; TISSUE SECTION; ANIMAL; BONE; CHEMISTRY; CRYSTALLIZATION; IMPLANT; MECHANICAL STRESS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; RABBIT; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; TORQUE;

ANIMALS; BONE AND BONES; COATED MATERIALS, BIOCOMPATIBLE; CRYSTALLIZATION; DURAPATITE; FEMALE; FEMUR; IMPLANTS, EXPERIMENTAL; KETONES; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; NANOPARTICLES; NANOSTRUCTURES; NANOTECHNOLOGY; OSSEOINTEGRATION; POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; RABBITS; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TORQUE;

EID: 84908887416     PISSN: 08853282     EISSN: 15308022     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0885328214542854     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007 ; 28: 4845-4869
2. Williams DF, McNamara A, Turner RM. Potential of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and carbon-fibre-reinforced PEEK in medical applications. J Mater Sci Lett. 1987 ; 6: 188-190
3. Skinner HB. Composite technology for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 ; 235: 224-236
4. Cho DY, Liau WR, Lee WY, et al. Preliminary experience using a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage in the treatment of cervical disc disease. Neurosurgery. 2002 ; 51: 1343-1349
5. Katzer A, Marquardt H, Westendorf J, et al. Polyetheretherketone-cytotoxicity and mutagenicity in vitro. Biomaterials. 2002 ; 23: 1749-1759
6. Morrison C, Macnair R, MacDonald C, et al. In vitro biocompatibility testing of polymers for orthopaedic implants using cultured fibroblasts and osteoblasts. Biomaterials. 1995 ; 16: 987-992
7. Rivard CH, Rhalmi S, Coillard C. In vivo biocompatibility testing of peek polymer for a spinal implant system: A study in rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002 ; 62: 488-498
8. Toth JM, Wang M, Estes BT, et al. Polyetheretherketone as a biomaterial for spinal applications. Biomaterials. 2006 ; 27: 324-334
9. Abu Bakar MS, Cheng MH, Tang SM, et al. Tensile properties, tension-tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone-hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants. Biomaterials. 2003 ; 24: 2245-2250
10. Ha SW, Mayer J, Koch B, et al. Plasma-sprayed hydroxylapatite coating on carbon fibre reinforced thermoplastic composite materials. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1994 ; 5: 481-484
11. Altankov G, Grinnell F, Groth T. Studies on the biocompatibility of materials: Fibroblast reorganization of substratum-bound fibronectin on surfaces varying in wettability. J Biomed Mater Res. 1996 ; 30: 385-391
12. Garcia AJ, Keselowsky BG. Biomimetic surfaces for control of cell adhesion to facilitate bone formation. Crit Rev Eukaryot Gene Expr. 2002 ; 12: 151-162
13. Lim JY, Shaughnessy MC, Zhou Z, et al. Surface energy effects on osteoblast spatial growth and mineralization. Biomaterials. 2008 ; 29: 1776-1784
14. Poulsson AH, Mitchell SA, Davidson MR, et al. Attachment of human primary osteoblast cells to modified polyethylene surfaces. Langmuir. 2009 ; 25: 3718-3727
15. Ha SW, Kirch M, Birchler F, et al. Surface activation of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and formation of calcium phosphate coatings by precipitation. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1997 ; 8: 683-690
16. Wu GM, Hsiao WD, Kung SF. Investigation of hydroxyapatite coated polyether ether ketone composites by gas plasma sprays. Surf Coat Technol. 2009 ; 203: 2755-2758
17. Lee JH, Jang HL, Lee KM, et al. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the bioactivity of hydroxyapatite-coated polyetheretherketone biocomposites created by cold spray technology. Acta Biomater. 2013 ; 9: 6177-6187
18. Rabiei A, Sandukas S. Processing and evaluation of bioactive coatings on polymeric implants. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2013 ; 101A: 2621-2629
19. Ellies LG, Carter JM, Natiella JR, et al. Quantitative analysis of early in vivo tissue response to synthetic apatite implants. J Biomed Mater Res. 1988 ; 22: 137-148
20. Gottlander M, Albrektsson T, Carlsson LV. A histomorphometric study of unthreaded hydroxyapatite-coated and titanium-coated implants in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1992 ; 7: 485-490
21. Jimbo R, Coelho PG, Bryington M, et al. Nano hydroxyapatite-coated implants improve bone nanomechanical properties. J Dent Res. 2012 ; 91: 1172-1177
22. Han CM, Lee EJ, Kim HE, et al. The electron beam deposition of titanium on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and the resulting enhanced biological properties. Biomaterials. 2010 ; 31: 3465-3470
23. Barkarmo S, Wennerberg A, Hoffman M, et al. Nano-hydroxyapatite-coated PEEK implants: A pilot study in rabbit bone. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2013 ; 101: 465-471
24. Albrektsson T. Hydroxyapatite-coated implants: A case against their use. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998 ; 56: 1312-1326
25. Rokkum M, Reigstad A, Johansson CB. HA particles can be released from well-fixed HA-coated stems: Histopathology of biopsies from 20 hips 2-8 years after implantation. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 ; 73: 298-306
26. Meirelles L, Arvidsson A, Andersson M, et al. Nano hydroxyapatite structures influence early bone formation. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2008 ; 87: 299-307
27. Svanborg LM, Hoffman M, Andersson M, et al. The effect of hydroxyapatite nanocrystals on early bone formation surrounding dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 ; 40: 308-315
28. Jimbo R, Xue Y, Hayashi M, et al. Genetic responses to nanostructured calcium-phosphate-coated implants. J Dent Res. 2011 ; 90: 1422-1427
29. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 ; 20: 172-184
30. Mendes VC, Moineddin R, Davies JE. The effect of discrete calcium phosphate nanocrystals on bone-bonding to titanium surfaces. Biomaterials. 2007 ; 28: 4748-4755
31. Ergun C, Liu H, Webster TJ, et al. Increased osteoblast adhesion on nanoparticulate calcium phosphates with higher Ca/P ratios. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2008 ; 85: 236-241
32. Gittens RA, McLachlan T, Olivares-Navarrete R, et al. The effects of combined micron-/submicron-scale surface roughness and nanoscale features on cell proliferation and differentiation. Biomaterials. 2011 ; 32: 3395-3403
33. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Structural influence from calcium phosphate coatings and its possible effect on enhanced bone integration. Acta Odontol Scand. 2009 ; 67: 333-340
34. Jimbo R, Sotres J, Johansson C, et al. The biological response to three different nanostructures applied on smooth implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 ; 23: 706-712
35. Ivanoff CJ, Sennerby L, Lekholm U. Influence of initial implant mobility on the integration of titanium implants. An experimental study in rabbits. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996 ; 7: 120-127
36. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Hansson HA, et al. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand. 1981 ; 52: 155-170
37. Kjellin P and Andersson M. SE-0401524-4, assignee. Synthetic nano-sized crystalline calcium phosphate and method of production patent SE527610. 2006.
38. He W, Kjellin P, Currie F, et al. Formation of bone-like nanocrystalline apatite using self-assembled liquid crystals. Chem Mater. 2011 ; 24: 892-902
39. Andersson M, Currie F and Kjellin P. Methods and systems of controlled coating of nanoparticles onto micro-rough implant surfaces and associated implants. Google Patents, 2010.
40. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Suggested guidelines for the topographic evaluation of implant surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000 ; 15: 331-344
41. Donath K. Die trenn-dünnschliff-technik zur herstellung histologischer präparate von nicht schneidbaren geweben und materialien. Der Präparator. 1988 ; 34: 197-206
42. Johansson CB, Morberg P. Importance of ground section thickness for reliable histomorphometrical results. Biomaterials. 1995 ; 16: 91-95
43. Sarve H, Johansson CB, Lindblad J, et al. Quantification of bone remodeling in the proximity of implants. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Computer analysis of images and patterns. Vienna, Austria: Springer-Verlag, 2007, pp. 253-260.
44. Ducheyne P, Qiu Q. Bioactive ceramics: The effect of surface reactivity on bone formation and bone cell function. Biomaterials. 1999 ; 20: 2287-2303
45. Suska F, Omar O, Emanuelsson L, et al. Enhancement of CRF-PEEK osseointegration by plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite: A rabbit model. J Biomater Appl. 2014 ;:
46. Zhu X, Eibl O, Scheideler L, et al. Characterization of nano hydroxyapatite/collagen surfaces and cellular behaviors. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006 ; 79: 114-127
47. Johansson CB. On tissue reactions to metal implants. Goteborgs Universitet, Sweden, 1991, p. 125.
48. Donath K, Laass M, Gunzl HJ. The histopathology of different foreign-body reactions in oral soft tissue and bone tissue. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1992 ; 420: 131-137
49. Bolind PK, Johansson CB, Becker W, et al. A descriptive study on retrieved non-threaded and threaded implant designs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 ; 16: 447-455
50. Carlsson L, Regner L, Johansson C, et al. Bone response to hydroxyapatite-coated and commercially pure titanium implants in the human arthritic knee. J Orthop Res. 1994 ; 12: 274-285
51. Anderson JM. Multinucleated giant cells. Curr Opin Hematol. 2000 ; 7: 40-47
52. Anderson JM, Defife K, McNally A, et al. Monocyte, macrophage and foreign body giant cell interactions with molecularly engineered surfaces. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1999 ; 10: 579-588
53. Anderson JM, Rodriguez A, Chang DT. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin Immunol. 2008 ; 20: 86-100
54. Johansson CB, Jimbo R, Roeser K Comprehensive biomaterials. Paul D, ed. Oxford: Elsevier ; 2011: 215-233.