Literature DB >> 21538208

In vivo biostability of polymeric spine implants: retrieval analyses from a United States investigational device exemption study.

Ming Shen1, Kai Zhang, Petra Koettig, William C Welch, John M Dawson.   

Abstract

The Dynesys System for stabilizing the lumbar spine was first surgically implanted in Europe in 1994. In 2003, a prospective, randomized, investigational device exemption clinical trial of the system for non-fusion dynamic stabilization began. Polycarbonate urethane (PCU) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) components explanted from four patients who had participated in the study were analyzed for biostability. Components had been implanted 9-19 months. The explanted components were visually inspected and digitally photographed. Scanning electron microscopy was used to analyze the surface of the spacers. The chemical and molecular properties of the retrieved spacers and cords were quantitatively compared with lot-matched, shelf-aged, components that had not been implanted using attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) and gel permeation chromatography (GPC). FTIR analyses suggested that the explanted spacers exhibited slight surface chemical changes but were chemically unchanged below the surface and in the center. New peaks that could be attributed to biodegradation of PCU were not observed. The spectral analyses for the cords revealed that the PET cords were chemically unchanged at both the surface and the interior. Peaks associated with the PET biodegradation were not detected. GPC results did not identify changes to the distributions of molecular weights that might be attributed to biodegradation of either PCU spacers or PET cords. The explanted condition of the retrieved components demonstrated the biostability of both PCU spacers and PET cords that had been in vivo for up to 19 months.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21538208      PMCID: PMC3207333          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-1812-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  22 in total

1.  In vivo deformation, surface damage, and biostability of retrieved Dynesys systems.

Authors:  Allyson Ianuzzi; Steven M Kurtz; William Kane; Priyanka Shah; Ryan Siskey; Andre van Ooij; Rajesh Bindal; Raymond Ross; Todd Lanman; Karin Büttner-Janz; Jorge Isaza
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  Biostability of polyurethane elastomers: a critical review.

Authors:  M Szycher
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 2.646

3.  Chemical stability of polyether urethanes versus polycarbonate urethanes.

Authors:  M C Tanzi; D Mantovani; P Petrini; R Guidoin; G Laroche
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1997-09-15

4.  Enzyme-induced biodegradation of polycarbonate polyurethanes: dependence on hard-segment concentration.

Authors:  Y W Tang; R S Labow; J P Santerre
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  2001-09-15

Review 5.  Factors and interactions affecting the performance of polyurethane elastomers in medical devices.

Authors:  A J Coury; P C Slaikeu; P T Cahalan; K B Stokes; C M Hobot
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 2.646

6.  Titanium-aluminium-niobium alloy, development for biocompatible, high strength surgical implants.

Authors:  M Semlitsch; F Staub; H Weber
Journal:  Biomed Tech (Berl)       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 1.411

7.  Long-term in vivo alterations of polyester vascular grafts in humans.

Authors:  G Riepe; J Loos; H Imig; A Schröder; E Schneider; J Petermann; A Rogge; M Ludwig; A Schenke; R Nassutt; N Chakfe; M Morlock
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 7.069

8.  In vitro stability of polyether and polycarbonate urethanes.

Authors:  M C Tanzi; S Farè; P Petrini
Journal:  J Biomater Appl       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.646

9.  Poly(carbonate urethane) and poly(ether urethane) biodegradation: in vivo studies.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Christenson; Mahrokh Dadsetan; Michael Wiggins; James M Anderson; Anne Hiltner
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 4.396

Review 10.  A review of the biostability and carcinogenicity of polyurethanes in medicine and the new generation of 'biostable' polyurethanes.

Authors:  L Pinchuk
Journal:  J Biomater Sci Polym Ed       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.517

View more
  4 in total

1.  Market approval processes for new types of spinal devices: challenges and recommendations for improvement.

Authors:  Arno Bisschop; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  In-vivo degradation of poly(carbonate-urethane) based spine implants.

Authors:  E Cipriani; P Bracco; S M Kurtz; L Costa; M Zanetti
Journal:  Polym Degrad Stab       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 5.030

3.  Bionate Biocompatibility: In Vivo Study in Rabbits.

Authors:  Amparo Vanaclocha-Saiz; Vicente Vanaclocha; Carlos Atienza; Pablo Jorda-Gomez; Víctor Primo-Capella; Carlos Barrios; Leyre Vanaclocha
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-08-19

4.  In vivo compatibility of Dynesys(®) spinal implants: a case series of five retrieved periprosthetic tissue samples and corresponding implants.

Authors:  M Neukamp; C Roeder; S Y Veruva; D W MacDonald; S M Kurtz; M J Steinbeck
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 3.134

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.