BACKGROUND: Artificial calcanei, fresh-frozen cadaver specimens, and embalmed cadaver specimens were compared in experimental testing under biocompatible loading to clarify the biocompatibility of artificial calcaneal specimens for implant testing. METHODS: Two different artificial calcaneal bone models (Sawbone, Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, WA, and Synbone, Synbone Inc., Davos, Switzerland), embalmed cadaver calcaneal specimens (bone density, 313.1 +/- 40.9 g/cm2; age, 43.8 +/- 7.9 years), and fresh-frozen cadaver calcanei (bone density, 238.5 +/- 30.0 g/cm2; age, 44.4 +/- 8.2 years) were used for testing. Seven specimens of each model or cadaver type were tested. A mechanical testing machine (Zwick Inc., Ulm, Germany) was used for loading and measurements. Cyclic loading (preload 20 N, load was increased every 100 cycles by 100 N from 1,000 to 2,500 N, 0.5 mm/s) and load to failure (0.5 mm/s) were performed. The loads were applied through an artificial talus in a physiological loading direction. The displacement of the posterior facet in the primary loading direction was measured. RESULTS: The four different specimen groups showed different stability and different displacement in the primary loading direction during cyclic loading. The variation of the maximal displacement in the primary loading direction for the entire cyclic loading was higher in artificial specimens than in the cadaver specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial calcanei (Sawbone, Synbone) showed different biomechanical characteristics than cadaver bones (embalmed and fresh-frozen) in this experimental setup with biocompatible cyclic loading. These results do not support the use of artificial calcanei for biomechanical implant testing. Fresh-frozen and embalmed specimens seem to be equally adequate for mechanical testing. The low variation of mechanical strength in the unpaired cadaver specimens suggests that the use of PAIRED specimens is not necessary.
BACKGROUND: Artificial calcanei, fresh-frozen cadaver specimens, and embalmed cadaver specimens were compared in experimental testing under biocompatible loading to clarify the biocompatibility of artificial calcaneal specimens for implant testing. METHODS: Two different artificial calcaneal bone models (Sawbone, Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, WA, and Synbone, Synbone Inc., Davos, Switzerland), embalmed cadaver calcaneal specimens (bone density, 313.1 +/- 40.9 g/cm2; age, 43.8 +/- 7.9 years), and fresh-frozen cadaver calcanei (bone density, 238.5 +/- 30.0 g/cm2; age, 44.4 +/- 8.2 years) were used for testing. Seven specimens of each model or cadaver type were tested. A mechanical testing machine (Zwick Inc., Ulm, Germany) was used for loading and measurements. Cyclic loading (preload 20 N, load was increased every 100 cycles by 100 N from 1,000 to 2,500 N, 0.5 mm/s) and load to failure (0.5 mm/s) were performed. The loads were applied through an artificial talus in a physiological loading direction. The displacement of the posterior facet in the primary loading direction was measured. RESULTS: The four different specimen groups showed different stability and different displacement in the primary loading direction during cyclic loading. The variation of the maximal displacement in the primary loading direction for the entire cyclic loading was higher in artificial specimens than in the cadaver specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial calcanei (Sawbone, Synbone) showed different biomechanical characteristics than cadaver bones (embalmed and fresh-frozen) in this experimental setup with biocompatible cyclic loading. These results do not support the use of artificial calcanei for biomechanical implant testing. Fresh-frozen and embalmed specimens seem to be equally adequate for mechanical testing. The low variation of mechanical strength in the unpaired cadaver specimens suggests that the use of PAIRED specimens is not necessary.
Authors: Somsak Sittitavornwong; Douglas Denson; David Ashley; David Cruz Walma; Sarah Potter; Jonathan Freind Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Neal P Dillon; Louis B Kratchman; Mary S Dietrich; Robert F Labadie; Robert J Webster; Thomas J Withrow Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Tobias Topp; Thorben Müller; Sebastian Huss; Peter Herbert Kann; Eberhard Weihe; Steffen Ruchholtz; Ralph Peter Zettl Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 3.717