Literature DB >> 21145778

Percutaneous implants with porous titanium dermal barriers: an in vivo evaluation of infection risk.

Dorthyann Isackson1, Lawrence D McGill, Kent N Bachus.   

Abstract

Osseointegrated percutaneous implants are a promising prosthetic alternative for a subset of amputees. However, as with all percutaneous implants, they have an increased risk of infection since they breach the skin barrier. Theoretically, host tissues could attach to the metal implant creating a barrier to infection. When compared with smooth surfaces, it is hypothesized that porous surfaces improve the attachment of the host tissues to the implant, and decrease the infection risk. In this study, four titanium implants, manufactured with a percutaneous post and a subcutaneous disk, were placed subcutaneously on the dorsum of eight New Zealand White rabbits. Beginning at four weeks post-op, the implants were inoculated weekly with 10(8) CFU Staphylococcus aureus until signs of clinical infection presented. While we were unable to detect a difference in the incidence of infection of the porous metal implants, smooth surface (no porous coating) percutaneous and subcutaneous components had a 7-fold increased risk of infection compared to the implants with a porous coating on one or both components. The porous coated implants displayed excellent tissue ingrowth into the porous structures; whereas, the smooth implants were surrounded with a thick, organized fibrotic capsule that was separated from the implant surface. This study suggests that porous coated metal percutaneous implants are at a significantly lower risk of infection when compared to smooth metal implants. The smooth surface percutaneous implants were inadequate in allowing a long-term seal to develop with the soft tissue, thus increasing vulnerability to the migration of infecting microorganisms. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21145778      PMCID: PMC3071885          DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2010.11.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Eng Phys        ISSN: 1350-4533            Impact factor:   2.242


  54 in total

Review 1.  Cutaneous wound healing.

Authors:  A J Singer; R A Clark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-09-02       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Utilization of prostheses among US veterans with traumatic amputation: a pilot survey.

Authors:  R A Sherman
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  1999-04

3.  Evaluation of the tissue reaction to a percutaneous access device using titanium fibre mesh anchorage in goats.

Authors:  M Gerritsen; Y G Paquay; J A Jansen
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  Development of a soft tissue seal around bone-anchored transcutaneous amputation prostheses.

Authors:  Catherine J Pendegrass; Allen E Goodship; Gordon W Blunn
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2006-04-17       Impact factor: 12.479

5.  Role of scaffold internal structure on in vivo bone formation in macroporous calcium phosphate bioceramics.

Authors:  Maddalena Mastrogiacomo; Silvia Scaglione; Roberta Martinetti; Laura Dolcini; Francesco Beltrame; Ranieri Cancedda; Rodolfo Quarto
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2006-02-20       Impact factor: 12.479

6.  Tissue reaction to soft-tissue anchored percutaneous implants in rabbits.

Authors:  J A Jansen; Y G Paquay; J P van der Waerden
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1994-09

7.  Design criteria for percutaneous devices.

Authors:  C Grosse-Siestrup; K Affeld
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1984-04

8.  Species-related differences in percutaneous wound healing.

Authors:  T Gangjee; R Colaizzo; A F von Recum
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.934

9.  Implant site infection rates with porous and dense materials.

Authors:  K Merritt; J W Shafer; S A Brown
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1979-01

10.  Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services.

Authors:  Liliana E Pezzin; Timothy R Dillingham; Ellen J Mackenzie; Patti Ephraim; Paddy Rossbach
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.966

View more
  16 in total

1.  Negative pressure wound therapy limits downgrowth in percutaneous devices.

Authors:  Saranne J Mitchell; Sujee Jeyapalina; Francesca R Nichols; Jayant Agarwal; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 3.617

2.  An animal model to evaluate skin-implant-bone integration and gait with a prosthesis directly attached to the residual limb.

Authors:  Brad J Farrell; Boris I Prilutsky; Robert S Kistenberg; John F Dalton; Mark Pitkin
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  Biomimetic coatings and negative pressure wound therapy independently limit epithelial downgrowth around percutaneous devices.

Authors:  Sujee Jeyapalina; Saranne J Mitchell; Jayant Agarwal; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  A novel vacuum assisted closure therapy model for use with percutaneous devices.

Authors:  Saranne J Cook; Francesca R Nichols; Lucille B Brunker; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 2.242

5.  A 24-month evaluation of a percutaneous osseointegrated limb-skin interface in an ovine amputation model.

Authors:  Sujee Jeyapalina; James Peter Beck; Jayant Agarwal; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 3.896

6.  Pig dorsum model for examining impaired wound healing at the skin-implant interface of percutaneous devices.

Authors:  Brian Mueller Holt; Daniel Holod Betz; Taylor Ann Ford; James Peter Beck; Roy Drake Bloebaum; Sujee Jeyapalina
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2013-07-06       Impact factor: 3.896

7.  Effects of pore size, implantation time, and nano-surface properties on rat skin ingrowth into percutaneous porous titanium implants.

Authors:  Brad J Farrell; Boris I Prilutsky; Jana M Ritter; Sean Kelley; Ketul Popat; Mark Pitkin
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 4.396

Review 8.  Design features of implants for direct skeletal attachment of limb prostheses.

Authors:  M Pitkin
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 4.396

9.  Mesenchymal stem cells increase collagen infiltration and improve wound healing response to porous titanium percutaneous implants.

Authors:  Dorthyann Isackson; Kevin J Cook; Lawrence D McGill; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2012-08-31       Impact factor: 2.242

10.  Can the Hydroxyapatite-Coated Skin-Penetrating Abutment for Bone Conduction Hearing Implants Integrate with the Surrounding Skin?

Authors:  Marc van Hoof; Stina Wigren; Hans Duimel; Paul H M Savelkoul; Mark Flynn; Robert Jan Stokroos
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2015-09-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.