Long term success of bone-interfacing implants remains a challenge in compromised patients and in areas of low bone quality. While surface roughness at the micro/nanoscale can promote osteogenesis, macro-scale porosity is important for promoting mechanical stability of the implant over time. Currently, machining techniques permit pores to be placed throughout the implant, but the pores are generally uniform in dimension. The advent of laser sintering provides a way to design and manufacture implants with specific porosity and variable dimensions at high resolution. This approach enables production of metal implants that mimic complex geometries found in biology. In this study, we used a rabbit femur model to compare osseointegration of laser sintered solid and porous implants. Ti-6Al-4V implants were laser sintered in a clinically relevant size and shape. One set of implants had a novel porosity based on human trabecular bone; both sets had grit-blasted/acid-etched surfaces. After characterization, implants were inserted transaxially into rabbit femora; mechanical testing, micro-computed tomography (microCT) and histomorphometry were conducted 10 weeks post-operatively. There were no differences in pull-out strength or bone-to-implant contact. However, both microCT and histomorphometry showed significantly higher new bone volume for porous compared to solid implants. Bone growth was observed into porous implant pores, especially near apical portions of the implant interfacing with cortical bone. These results show that laser sintered Ti-6Al-4V implants with micro/nanoscale surface roughness and trabecular bone-inspired porosity promote bone growth and may be used as a superior alternative to solid implants for bone-interfacing implants.
Long term success of bone-interfacing implants remains a challenge in compromised n class="Species">patients and in areas of low bone quality. While surface roughness at the micro/nanoscale can promote osteogenesis, macro-scale porosity is important for promoting mechanical stability of the implant over time. Currently, machining techniques permit pores to be placed throughout the implant, but the pores are generally uniform in dimension. The advent of laser sintering provides a way to design and manufacture implants with specific porosity and variable dimensions at high resolution. This approach enables production of metal implants that mimic complex geometries found in biology. In this study, we used a rabbit femur model to compare osseointegration of laser sintered solid and porous implants. Ti-6Al-4V implants were laser sintered in a clinically relevant size and shape. One set of implants had a novel porosity based on human trabecular bone; both sets had grit-blasted/acid-etched surfaces. After characterization, implants were inserted transaxially into rabbit femora; mechanical testing, micro-computed tomography (microCT) and histomorphometry were conducted 10 weeks post-operatively. There were no differences in pull-out strength or bone-to-implant contact. However, both microCT and histomorphometry showed significantly higher new bone volume for porous compared to solid implants. Bone growth was observed into porous implant pores, especially near apical portions of the implant interfacing with cortical bone. These results show that laser sintered Ti-6Al-4V implants with micro/nanoscale surface roughness and trabecular bone-inspired porosity promote bone growth and may be used as a superior alternative to solid implants for bone-interfacing implants.
Authors: Rolando A Gittens; Rene Olivares-Navarrete; Alice Cheng; David M Anderson; Taylor McLachlan; Ingrid Stephan; Jürgen Geis-Gerstorfer; Kenneth H Sandhage; Andrei G Fedorov; Frank Rupp; Barbara D Boyan; Rina Tannenbaum; Zvi Schwartz Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Sharon L Hyzy; Alice Cheng; David J Cohen; Gustavo Yatzkaier; Alexander J Whitehead; Ryan M Clohessy; Rolando A Gittens; Barbara D Boyan; Zvi Schwartz Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: Rolando A Gittens; Lutz Scheideler; Frank Rupp; Sharon L Hyzy; Jürgen Geis-Gerstorfer; Zvi Schwartz; Barbara D Boyan Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2014-04-05 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Rene Olivares-Navarrete; Sharon L Hyzy; Paul J Slosar; Jennifer M Schneider; Zvi Schwartz; Barbara D Boyan Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: D J Cohen; A Cheng; A Kahn; M Aviram; A J Whitehead; S L Hyzy; R M Clohessy; B D Boyan; Z Schwartz Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Michael B Berger; Thomas W Jacobs; Barbara D Boyan; Zvi Schwartz Journal: J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 3.368
Authors: Helena Filipa Pereira; Ibrahim Fatih Cengiz; Filipe Samuel Silva; Rui Luís Reis; Joaquim Miguel Oliveira Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2020-03-02 Impact factor: 3.896
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
Authors: Alice Frosch; Sebastian Krohn; Gottfried Buchhorn; Wolfgang Lehmann; Karl-Heinz Frosch; László Füzesi; Stephan Frosch Journal: Histol Histopathol Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Stephan Frosch; Gottfried Buchhorn; Sebastian Krohn; Wolfgang Lehmann; Karl-Heinz Frosch; László Füzesi; Alice Frosch Journal: Histol Histopathol Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: James Tedesco; Bryan E J Lee; Alex Y W Lin; Dakota M Binkley; Kathleen H Delaney; Jacek M Kwiecien; Kathryn Grandfield Journal: Int J Dent Date: 2017-11-19