| Literature DB >> 36117815 |
Martin Lars Johansson1,2, Furqan A Shah1, Måns Eeg-Olofsson3,4, Peter Monksfield5, Peter Thomsen1, Anders Palmquist1.
Abstract
Osseointegration, the ability for an implant to be anchored in bone tissue with direct bone-implant contact and allowing for continuous adaptive remodelling, is clinically used in different reconstructive fields, such as dentistry, orthopedics and otology. The latter uses a bone conducting sound processor connected to a skin-penetrating abutment that is mounted on a titanium implant placed in the temporal bone, thereby acting as a path for transmission of the vibrations generated by the sound processor. The success of the treatment relies on bone healing and osseointegration, which could be improved by surface modifications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term osseointegration in a sheep skull model and compare a laser-ablated implant surface with a machined implant. Commercially available 4 mm titanium implants, either with a machined (Wide Ponto) or a laser-ablated surface (Ponto BHX, Oticon Medical, Sweden), were used in the current study. The surfaces were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. The implantation was performed with a full soft tissue flap and the osteotomy was prepared using the MIPS drill kit (Oticon Medical, Sweden) prior to installation of the implants in the frontal bone of eight female sheep. After five months, biopsies including the implant and surrounding bone tissue obtained, processed and analysed using histology, histomorphometry, scanning electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy. The animals healed well, without signs of adverse events. Histomorphometry showed a large amount of bone tissue around both implant types, with 75% of the threaded area occupied by bone for both implant types. A large amount of bone-implant contact was observed for both implant types, with 67%-71% of the surface covered by bone. Both implant types were surrounded by mature remodelled lamellar bone with high mineral content, corroborating the histological observations. The current results show that the laser-ablated surface induces healing similar to the well-known clinically used machined surface in ovine cranial bone. In conclusion, the present long-term experimental results indicate that a laser-ablated implant performs equally well as a clinically used implant with a machined surface. This, together with previously reported, improved early biomechanical anchorage, suggests future, safe and efficient clinical potential.Entities:
Keywords: BAHS; bone anchored hearing; hearing implant; in vivo; laser; osseointegration; surface properties; titanium implant
Year: 2022 PMID: 36117815 PMCID: PMC9470750 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.885964
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Surg ISSN: 2296-875X
Figure 13d representation of the machined (A) and laser-modified (B) implants. Machined (C–F) and laser-modified implants (G–J) observed using secondary electron scanning electron microscopy. The surface of the machined implants exhibits ridges and grooves resulting from the machining process (C–F) whereas a distinct micro- and nanotexture is superimposed in the thread valleys of the laser-modified implant (G–J). Chemical composition of the surfaces of the machined implant and the nontreated and treated areas of the laser-modified implant as determined by Auger Electron Spectroscopy (AES) (K).
Figure 2Integration between the bone and machined (A–C) and laser-modified (D–F) implants. Optical microscopy. Histological evaluation shows that both the machined (A) and laser-modified (D) implants are positioned vertically in the skull and surrounded by a considerable amount of bone tissue. No signs of inflammation were observed. Mature bone is detected close to the implant surface. Osteons with central blood vessels (red asterisk) and concentric lamellae with coaligned osteocytes (red arrow) are indicated (C,F). Separation of the bone tissue from the titanium surface (white arrow in C) is observed more frequently for the machined implants than for the laser-modified implants. (G) Bone area and bone–implant contact measured using histomorphometry.
Figure 3(A) Raman spectroscopy. Left: Before (black) and after (grey) background subtraction. Integral areas of ν2 PO43−, Pro + Hyp, and Amide III are indicated. Right: Two Gaussian curves are fitted to the 940–980 cm−1 region (ν1 PO43−). The full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) of the Gaussian curve centred at ∼960 cm−1 is taken as mineral crystallinity. A single Gaussian curve is fitted to the 1056–1086 cm−1 region (ν1 CO32−). A single Lorentzian curve is fitted to the 998–1008 cm−1 region (Phe). (B) Bone extracellular matrix composition (mineral crystallinity, carbonate-to-phosphate ratios, and mineral-to-matrix ratios) assessed using Raman spectroscopy. (C–D) backscattered electron scanning electron microscopy (BSE-SEM) of the machined (C) and laser-modified (D) implants. * indicates within thread region of interest + indicates the native bone region of interest.