| Literature DB >> 27060078 |
Norbert Harrasser1, Johannes Gorkotte2, Andreas Obermeier2, Susanne Feihl3, Melanie Straub4, Julia Slotta-Huspenina4, Ruediger von Eisenhart-Rothe2, Walter Moser5, Philipp Gruner6, Michael de Wild7, Hans Gollwitzer2,8, Rainer Burgkart2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Animal models serve as an important tool to understand peri-implant infection. Most of the models use high bacterial loads (>10(4) colony forming units, CFU) to provide high infection rates. Therefore these animals evolve rather similarly, making comparison between groups and statistical analysis possible. On the other hand, to mimic clinical constellation of surgery-related infections the use of low amounts of bacteria would be more advantageous.Entities:
Keywords: Implant-associated infections; Metaphysis; Rat; Screw; Staphylococcus aureus
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27060078 PMCID: PMC4826501 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-1005-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1SEM image of the coated screw implant (diameter = 3.5 mm; length = 5 mm)
Fig. 2Coating structure of HA (left) and HA-Ag (right)
Surface roughness (mean score values ± standard deviation) of the implant
| Ra [μm] | SRa [μm] | SRz [μm] | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group I (HA) | 2.49 ± 0.62 | 2.98 ± 0.24 | 117.38 ± 10.74 |
| Group II (HA-Ag) | 2.21 ± 0.47 | 3.22 ± 0.80 | 105.03 ± 12.07 |
Fig. 3SEM analysis (backscattered electron detector) of both surface types before and after implantation
Fig. 4Operative procedure (left tibia): a Skin incision at the anterolateral aspect of the proximal tibia, b visible proximal tibia after blunt dissection of soft tissues, c drilling and tapping of unicortical hole, d injection of PBS (left tibia = control site), e insertion of implant (screw not yet full countersinked), f skin closure with intracutaneous and interrupted sutures
Main features of testing groups
| Group | IA | IB | IIA | IIB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Implant coating | HA | HA-Ag | ||
| Right tibia: | 102 | 103 | 102 | 103 |
| Left tibia: | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Number of animals | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
Scoring system for resistance-to-removal (RTR) and attached bone remnants (ABR)
| Score | RTR | ABR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loose screw can be removed with forceps only | No bone detectable on implant |
| 2 | Little resistance (only tip of 2 fingers needed to hold screwdriver) | Traces of bone remnants on implant |
| 3 | Moderate resistance (screwdriver held in pinch grip) | Thin bone layer on implant (10–25 % of surface coated with bone) |
| 4 | Strong resistance (like 3 but more power needed) | Moderate bone layer on implant (25–50 % of surface coated with bone) |
| 5 | Bone fracture with screw partly covered by bone | Thick bone layer on implant (>50 % of surface coated with bone) |
Fig. 5Scoring of osseointegration (Note: shaded area in red indicates bone on implant surface after explantation of the screw)
Number (mean ± standard deviation) of leucocytes = white blood cells (WBC), erythrocytes = red blood cells (RBC), and platelets in blood samples on day of surgery (day 1) and at sacrifice (day 42)
| Parameter | Group IA (102 CFU) | Group IB (103 CFU) | Group IIA (102 CFU) | Group IIB (103 CFU) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1 | Day 42 | Day 1 | Day 42 | Day 1 | Day 42 | Day 1 | Day 42 | |
| WBC (×103/l) | 9,23 ± 1,98 | 7,53 ± 1,97 | 9,33 ± 3,71 | 6,05 ± 1,80 | 9,07 ± 1,98 | 7,87 ± 3,22 | 9,62 ± 2,62 | 8,57 ± 3,59 |
| RBC (×106/l) | 8,27 ± 0,76 | 8,64 ± 0,95 | 7,13 ± 2,40 | 8,55 ± 1,08 | 8,21 ± 1,41 | 8,38 ± 0,67 | 8,19 ± 1,29 | 6,34 ± 5,66 |
| Platelets (×103/l) | 834,5 ± 189,25 | 628,33 ± 237,56 | 717,83 ± 406,97 | 599,83 ± 528,47 | 912,17 ± 135,77 | 649,00 ± 321,04 | 763,33 ± 290,16 | 751,50 ± 343,20 |
Note: No statistical significant difference regarding various parameters of different groups was found between day 1 and 42
*p < 0.05 in groups between day 1 and day 42
Microbiological results and bone weight of right tibiae (infected) determined on day of sacrifice; a positive tested on S. aureus
| Groups | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IA (HA, | IB (HA, | IIA (HA-Ag, | IIB (HA-Ag, | ||
| Cultures of subcutaneous smears | Positivea | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Cultures of implant surface smears | Positivea | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Cultures of implant | Positivea | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Cultures of peri-implant bone | Positivea | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Bone weight [mg] | 504 ± 27 | 498 ± 37 | 456 ± 67 | 546 ± 78 | |
CFU values (mean ± standard deviation) at implantation day (Inoculum) and day of sacrifice of the implant and the periprosthetic bone; p-values are given for comparison Inoculum/Implant and Implant/Bone
| Groups | Target | CFU/10 μl | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inoculum | Implant |
| Bone |
| ||
| IA (HA) | 102 | 1.16x102 ± 75 | 116.1x 103 ± 112x103 | <.05 | 21.5x103 ± 29.3x103 | <.05 |
| IIA (HA-Ag) | 102 | 1.71x102 ± 52 | 392.2x103 ± 641x103 | <.05 | 30.2x103 ± 38.3x103 | <.05 |
| IB (HA) | 103 | 0.97x103 ± 221 | 302.2x 103 ± 298x103 | <.05 | 8.2x103 ± 3.9x103 | <.05 |
| IIB (HA-Ag) | 103 | 0.83x103 ± 278 | 119.3x 103 ± 161x103 | <.05 | 60.9x103 ± 55.1x103 | <.05 |
Outcome of radiographic and histologic assessment and osseointegration (mean score values ± standard deviation)
| Groups | IA (HA) | IB (HA) | IIA (HA-Ag) | IIB (HA-Ag) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | |
| CFU | 0 | 102 | 0 | 103 | 0 | 102 | 0 | 103 |
| Radiographic score | 0 ± 0 | 16.5 ± 6.4* | 0 ± 0 | 15 ± 5* | 0 ± 0 | 15.8 ± 4.8* | 0 ± 0 | 16.5 ± 3.3* |
| Histologic score | 0 | 16 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 9 |
| Osseointegration score | 8.7 ± 0.5 | 5 ± 0.5* | 9.7 ± 0.4 | 4.7 ± 0.5* | 9.3 ± 0.5 | 5.3 ± 0.5* | 9 ± 0.5 | 4.3 ± 0.4* |
*p < 0.05 between right (infected) and left (sterile) tibiae of each group
Fig. 6a Overview over epi-metaphysis and proximal diaphysis of a right tibia (inoculation with 102 CFU), showing subacute osteomyelitis (H&E stain). b 25 x magnification of picture A, showing inflammatory infiltrate (asterisk), containing mononuclear cells and granulocytes, and bone necrosis (black arrow) (H&E stain). c Bone erosion (black arrow) due to inflammatory infiltrate (asterisk) (15 x magnification, van Gieson’s stain)
Fig. 7X-rays of tibiae in a.-p.-view at day of implantation (d = 0) and at day of sacrifice 6 weeks postop (d = 42). White lines mark regions of interest separately assessed for scoring. R1, epiphysis; R2, metaphysis; R3, proximal diaphysis. a and b Right tibia of infected animal showing signs of infection with osteolysis, and loose implant at day of sacrifice. c and d Left tibia (sterile) of an animal with no radiographic signs of osteomyelitis or implant loosening
Fig. 8Osseointegration examined by histology. The surface of the implants is entirely coated by a thin layer of newly formed bone (blue) which is reached by trabeculae from the cancellous bone; HA (left), HA-Ag (right)