Literature DB >> 8788113

Bone remodeling around implanted ceramics.

Y S Chang1, M Oka, T Nakamura, H O Gu.   

Abstract

Bone formation and remodeling around implanted materials is influenced by the kind of material, its surface properties, and the anatomical site of implantation. In this study, differences in bone formation around three kinds of ceramics and the importance of the implant location in the tibia were investigated. In the first experiment, we placed three kinds of ceramics--alumina, zirconia and hydroxyapatite (HA)--into the medullary cavity of rabbit tibiae and examined histologically the time-dependent formation of bone around the materials for up to 24 weeks postoperatively. We found that bone formation depends on whether or not the materials are in direct contact with the endosteum. In the second experiment, the same three ceramic materials were implanted transcortically into rabbit tibiae. The bone formed around the implants was most abundant in regions adjacent to the periosteum, followed by the endosteum and the marrow cavity in the approximate ratios of 70%, 40%, and 10%, respectively. In these two experiments, the difference between bioactive and bioinert ceramics could be seen in the interface between the implanted material and the bone. It can be concluded that bone formation around these materials is related to the osteoconductivity of the materials and to the osteogenic capacity of the tissues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8788113     DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199601)30:1<117::AID-JBM15>3.0.CO;2-L

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res        ISSN: 0021-9304


  4 in total

1.  Macroporous glass-ceramic materials with bioactive properties.

Authors:  C Vitale-Brovarone; S Di Nunzio; O Bretcanu; E Verné
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  Bone ingrowth in zirconia and hydroxyapatite scaffolds with identical macroporosity.

Authors:  Johan Malmström; Erik Adolfsson; Lena Emanuelsson; Peter Thomsen
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 3.896

3.  Biomechanical and histological evaluation of the osseointegration capacity of two types of zirconia implant.

Authors:  Jian-Min Han; Guang Hong; Hong Lin; Yoshinaka Shimizu; Yuhan Wu; Gang Zheng; Hongyu Zhang; Keiichi Sasaki
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2016-12-07

4.  Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: an in vivo study.

Authors:  Rita Depprich; Holger Zipprich; Michelle Ommerborn; Christian Naujoks; Hans-Peter Wiesmann; Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen; Hans-Christoph Lauer; Ulrich Meyer; Norbert R Kübler; Jörg Handschel
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2008-12-11       Impact factor: 2.151

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.