| Literature DB >> 25127722 |
Knut Harboe1, Nils R Gjerdet, Einar Sudmann, Kari Indrekvam, Kjetil Søreide.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of uncemented hip implants, there has been a search for the best surface coating to enhance bone apposition in order to improve retention. The surface coating of the different stems varies between products. The aim was to assess the retention force and bone adaption in two differently coated stems in a weight-bearing goat model.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25127722 PMCID: PMC4237892 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-014-0069-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Figure 1Design of the study. Design of the study comparing hydroxyapatite and calcium phosphate coating of an experimental hip stem in a goat model.
Figure 2Descriptive details and design of the study implants. (A) Front, side and top views. Far right, stem with drill bit. CP-TPS calcium phosphate-coated area, CP + TPS calcium phosphate on porous commercially pure titanium in groove, D drill bit, G groove. (B) Front, side and top views. Note on top view that the grooves are more than 180° to prevent the drill bit from going astray. Far right, stem with drill bit. HA hydroxyapatite-coated area, D drill bit, G groove. Transverse canals are 1 mm in diameter. (Reproduced with permission from VCOT [12]).
Figure 3Pull-out force of study implants. Box-and-whiskers plot of pull-out force measured in CP and HA groups. The box indicates the 25th and 75th quartiles, with the median (bold line). The whiskers represent minimum and maximum values. An outlier is indicated by the circle. The difference in median was statistically significant (**p = 0.003).
Figure 4Histological evaluation of cross-sectioned bone after stem removal. Microscopic sample from a cross section from the top third of the stem. (A) CP group. (B) HA group. Scale is reported in millimetres.