Literature DB >> 12394919

The biologic response to particles from a lumbar disc prosthesis.

Robert J Moore1, Robert D Fraser, Barrie Vernon-Roberts, John W Finnie, Peter C Blumbergs, David R Haynes, Martin J Hutchens, Rebecca M Walters, Anant S Kamat, Barbara Koszyca.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Particles of a proprietary polyolefin rubber compound used in a lumbar disc prosthesis were generated in vitro and tested for biocompatibility in two animal models. OBJECTIVE To characterize any tissue response to polyolefin rubber particles. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intervertebral disc prostheses are emerging as alternatives to fusion techniques for the treatment of symptomatic disc degeneration. The biocompatibility of all novel components used in the construction of these devices must be verified before they can be considered for general use.
METHODS: Laboratory-generated polyolefin rubber particles were either injected into dorsal subcutaneous air pouches of 30 rats or placed directly onto the lumbosacral dura and nerve roots of 9 sheep. Histologic sections of tissues from, and remote from, the site of implantation were examined for evidence of inflammation and wound-healing responses.
RESULTS: Polyolefin rubber particle debris induced a tissue response that was consistent with a normal foreign body reaction to large particles. The response was not significantly greater than that seen with similar size particles of ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene. There was no evidence of particle migration from the site of implantation, and there was no evidence of local or systemic toxic effects.
CONCLUSION: Polyolefin rubber particles induce only localized tissue response that is consistent with a normal foreign body reaction to large nontoxic particles.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12394919     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200210010-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  5 in total

Review 1.  Design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Chiara M Bellini; Thomas Zweig; Stephen Ferguson; Manuela T Raimondi; Claudio Lamartina; Marco Brayda-Bruno; Maurizio Fornari
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Professor Barrie Vernon-Roberts, AO, MD, BSc, PhD, FRCPath, FRCPA, FAOrthA (Hon), FRS.SA.

Authors:  K D Rainsford; D R Haynes
Journal:  Inflammopharmacology       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 4.473

3.  Metallosis in shoulder arthroplasty: an integrative review of literature.

Authors:  Paritosh Gogna; Paolo Paladini; Giovanni Merolla; Carlo Alberto Augusti; De Falco Maddalena; Giuseppe Porcellini
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2016-11-30

4.  Biotribological evaluation of artificial disc arthroplasty devices: influence of loading and kinematic patterns during in vitro wear simulation.

Authors:  Thomas M Grupp; James J Yue; Rolando Garcia; Janet Basson; Jens Schwiesau; Bernhard Fritz; Wilhelm Blömer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Clinical performance of an elastomeric lumbar disc replacement: Minimum 12 months follow-up.

Authors:  Luiz Pimenta; Raul Springmuller; Casey K Lee; Leonardo Oliveira; Sandra E Roth; William F Ogilvie
Journal:  SAS J       Date:  2010-03-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.