Literature DB >> 25743106

Is There A Difference in Bone Ingrowth in Modular Versus Monoblock Porous Tantalum Tibial Trays?

Josa A Hanzlik1, Judd S Day2, Clare M Rimnac3, Steven M Kurtz2.   

Abstract

Contemporary total knee designs incorporating highly porous metallic surfaces have demonstrated promising clinical outcomes. However, stiffness differences between modular and monoblock porous tantalum tibial trays may affect bone ingrowth. This study investigated effect of implant design, spatial location and clinical factors on bone ingrowth. Three modular and twenty-one monoblock retrieved porous tantalum tibial trays were evaluated for bone ingrowth. Nonparametric statistical tests were used to investigate differences in bone ingrowth by implant design, tray spatial location, substrate depth and clinical factors. Modular trays (5.3 ± 3.2%) exhibited higher bone ingrowth than monoblock trays (1.6 ± 1.9%, P = 0.032). Bone ingrowth in both designs was highest in the initial 500 μm from the surface. Implantation time was positively correlated with bone ingrowth for monoblock trays.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aseptic loosening; bone ingrowth; porous tantalum; porous tantalum tibial trays; tibial tray design

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25743106      PMCID: PMC4469529          DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.01.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  26 in total

1.  Problems with cementless total knee arthroplasty at 11 years followup.

Authors:  R A Berger; J H Lyon; J J Jacobs; R M Barden; E M Berkson; M B Sheinkop; A G Rosenberg; J O Galante
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  D E Font-Rodriguez; G R Scuderi; J N Insall
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Histology of porous-coated acetabular components. 25 cementless cups retrieved after arthroplasty.

Authors:  D R Sumner; M Jasty; J J Jacobs; R M Urban; C R Bragdon; W H Harris; J O Galante
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1993-12

4.  A histomorphometric and histologic analysis of the implant interface in five successful, autopsy-retrieved, noncemented porous-coated knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  V J Vigorita; B Minkowitz; J F Dichiara; P A Higham
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Quantitative histologic analysis of tissue growth into porous total knee components.

Authors:  S D Cook; R L Barrack; K A Thomas; R J Haddad
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Osteolysis around cementless porous-coated anatomic knee prostheses.

Authors:  Y H Kim; J H Oh; S H Oh
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1995-03

7.  Fixation of a hydroxyapatite-tricalcium phosphate-coated cementless knee prosthesis. Clinical and radiographic evaluation seven years after surgery.

Authors:  S Akizuki; T Takizawa; H Horiuchi
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2003-11

8.  Uncemented rotating-platform total knee replacement: a five to twelve-year follow-up study.

Authors:  R Barry Sorrells; Paul E Voorhorst; Jeffrey A Murphy; Maryrose P Bauschka; A Seth Greenwald
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Bone ingrowth and wear debris in well-fixed cementless porous-coated tibial components removed from patients.

Authors:  D R Sumner; H Kienapfel; J J Jacobs; R M Urban; T M Turner; J O Galante
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.757

10.  Radiographic and histologic study of porous coated tibial component fixation in cementless total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  G A Engh; J D Bobyn; T L Petersen
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  5 in total

1.  Enhanced repair of segmental bone defects in rabbit radius by porous tantalum scaffolds modified with the RGD peptide.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Qijia Li; Qian Wang; Hui Zhang; Wei Shi; Hongquan Gan; Huiping Song; Zhiqiang Wang
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  The effect of surface topography and porosity on the tensile fatigue of 3D printed Ti-6Al-4V fabricated by selective laser melting.

Authors:  Cambre N Kelly; Nathan T Evans; Cameron W Irvin; Savita C Chapman; Ken Gall; David L Safranski
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 7.328

3.  Effect of porous orthopaedic implant material and structure on load sharing with simulated bone ingrowth: A finite element analysis comparing titanium and PEEK.

Authors:  R Dana Carpenter; Brett S Klosterhoff; F Brennan Torstrick; Kevin T Foley; J Kenneth Burkus; Christopher S D Lee; Ken Gall; Robert E Guldberg; David L Safranski
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2018-04

4.  Total Knee Replacement with an Uncemented Porous Tantalum Tibia Component: A Failure Analysis.

Authors:  Samo K Fokter; Nenad Gubeljak; Esther Punzón-Quijorna; Primož Pelicon; Mitja Kelemen; Primož Vavpetič; Jožef Predan; Luka Ferlič; Igor Novak
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Catastrophic tibial baseplate failure of a modern cementless total knee arthroplasty implant.

Authors:  William F Scully; Matthew E Deren; Michael R Bloomfield
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2019-10-16
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.