MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTIC AND BIOCOMPATIBILITY EVALUATION OF POROUS TANTALUM IMPLANTED INTO RABBIT PATELLAR TENDON_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

GANHongquan ¹ ,  LIQijia ² , WANGQian ³ , LUJian ¹ , GENGLixin ² , SONGHuiping ¹ , WANGZhiqiang ¹

1. Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Hospital, Hebei United University, Tangshan Hebei, 063000, P. R. China;
2. Experimental Center, Hebei United University;
3. Department of Anatomy, Basic Medical College of Hebei United University;

Corresponding author：

LIQijia, Email: qjl1222de@163.com

Keywords：

Porous tantalum; Tendon-bone fixation device; Bone implantation material; Patellar tendon; Biocompatibility; Rabbi

DOI：

10.7507/1002-1892.20140103

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To observe the morphological characteristic by implanting domestic porous tantalum in rabbit patellar tendon and to evaluate biocompatibility features so as to provide experimental basis for porous tantalum used as interface fixation between tendon and bone. Methods A total of 48 adult New Zealand white rabbits, male or female, weighing 2.5-3.0 kg, were selected. Porous tantalum flake (5 mm×5 mm×2 mm) was implanted in the left patellar tendon (experimental group) and the same size porous titanium flake in the right patellar tendon (control group). The animals were sacrificed at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks after implantation, then the specimens were harvested for gross observation, HE staining, scanning electron microscope (SEM) observation, and hard slices observation. Results No animal died after operation. Porous tantalum was bonded closely with host tendon and no inflammatory reaction was found. Loose and thick fibrous capsule was observed at the beginning and became density and thinner in the end by microscope, showing significant difference between different time points in 2 groups (P<0.05), but no significant difference was found between 2 groups at different time points (P>0.05). The SEM observation showed that fibrous tissue attached to the surface and inner walls of porous tantalum at early stage, and extended on the material to reach confluence at late period, but the experimental group was more than the control group. Hard slices observation showed that the collagen fibrils were seen on porous tantalum interface with host tendon, and blood vessels grew into the pores. The control group and the experimental group showed no significant difference. Conclusion The domestic porous tantalum has good biocompatibility. Connection and integration can be established between tendon and porous tantalum, and therefore it could be used in reconstruction of tendon-bone fixation device.

Citation： GANHongquan, LIQijia, WANGQian, LUJian, GENGLixin, SONGHuiping, WANGZhiqiang. MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTIC AND BIOCOMPATIBILITY EVALUATION OF POROUS TANTALUM IMPLANTED INTO RABBIT PATELLAR TENDON. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2014, 28(4): 452-456. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.20140103 Copy

1.	翟永清, 张鹏, 戴尅戎. 肌腱-假体连接的研究现状与展望. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2010, 4(1):120-123.
2.	Levine B, Sporer S, Della Valle CJ, et al. Porous tantalum in reconstructive surgery of the knee:a review. J Knee Surg, 2007, 20(3):185-194.
3.	Schildhauer TA, Robie B, Muhr G, et al. Bacterial adherence to tantalum versus commonly used orthopedic metallic implant materials. J Orthop Trauma, 2006, 20(7):476-484.
4.	王大鹏, 李琪佳, 王志强. 医用多孔钽的性能及其在膝关节损伤中的应用. 中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2011, 15(29):5463-5466.
5.	贾永伟, 蔡宣松. 骨肿瘤假体植入后肌腱固定的临床与基础研究. 同济大学学报:医学版, 2002, 23(1):59-61.
6.	Wang N, Li H, Wang J, et al. Study on the anticorrosion, biocompatibility, and osteoinductivity of tantalum decorated with tantalum oxide nanotube array films. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2012, 4(9):4516-4523.
7.	Kim DG, Huja SS, Tee BC, et al. Bone ingrowth and initial stability of titanium and porous tantalum dental implants:a pilot canine study. Implant Dent, 2013, 22(4):399-405.
8.	Tashiro T, Kurosawa H, Kawakami A, et al. Influence of medial hamstring tendon harvest on knee flexor strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction:a detailed evaluation with comparison of single- and double-tendon harvest. Am J Sports Med, 2003, 31(4):522-529.
9.	Dalury DF, Dennis DA. Extensor mechanism problems following total knee replacement. J Knee Surg, 2003, 16(2):118-122.
10.	Bobyn JD, Poggie RE, Krygier JJ, et al. Clinical validation of a structural porous tantalum biomaterial for adult reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2004, 86-A Suppl 2:123-129.
11.	Cohen R. A porous tantalum trabecular metal. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 2002, 31(4):216-217.
12.	Balla VK, Bodhak S, Bose S, et al. Porous tantalum structures for bone implants:Fabrication, mechanical and in vitro biological properties. Acta Biomater, 2010, 6(8):3349-3359.
13.	Sinclair SK, Konz GJ, Dawson JM, et al. Host bone response to polyetheretherketone versus porous tantalum implants for cervical spinal fusion in a goat model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2012, 37(10):571-580.
14.	Shuler MS, Rooks MD, Roberson JR. Porous tantalum implant in early steonecrosis of the hip:preliminary report on operative, survival, and outcomes results. J Arthroplasty, 2007, 22(1):26-31.
15.	Reach JS Jr, Dickey ID, Zobitz ME, et al. Direct tendon attachment and healing to porous tantalum:An experimental animal study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2007, 89(5):1000-1009.
16.	Holt GE, Christie MJ, Schwartz HS. Trabecular metal endoprosthetic limb salvage reconstruction of the lower limb. J Arthroplasty, 2009, 24(7):1079-1085.
17.	Jonitz A, Lochner K, Lindner T, et al. Oxygen consumption, acidification and migration capacity of human primary osteoblasts withina three-dimensional tantalum scaffold. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2011, 22(9):2089-2095.
18.	Mrosek EH, Schagemann JC, Chung HW, et al. Porous tantalum and poly-epsilon-caprolactone biocomposites for osteochondral defect repair:preliminary studies in rabbits. J Orthop Res, 2010, 28(2):141-148.

1. 翟永清, 张鹏, 戴尅戎. 肌腱-假体连接的研究现状与展望. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2010, 4(1):120-123.
2. Levine B, Sporer S, Della Valle CJ, et al. Porous tantalum in reconstructive surgery of the knee:a review. J Knee Surg, 2007, 20(3):185-194.
3. Schildhauer TA, Robie B, Muhr G, et al. Bacterial adherence to tantalum versus commonly used orthopedic metallic implant materials. J Orthop Trauma, 2006, 20(7):476-484.
4. 王大鹏, 李琪佳, 王志强. 医用多孔钽的性能及其在膝关节损伤中的应用. 中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2011, 15(29):5463-5466.
5. 贾永伟, 蔡宣松. 骨肿瘤假体植入后肌腱固定的临床与基础研究. 同济大学学报:医学版, 2002, 23(1):59-61.
6. Wang N, Li H, Wang J, et al. Study on the anticorrosion, biocompatibility, and osteoinductivity of tantalum decorated with tantalum oxide nanotube array films. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2012, 4(9):4516-4523.
7. Kim DG, Huja SS, Tee BC, et al. Bone ingrowth and initial stability of titanium and porous tantalum dental implants:a pilot canine study. Implant Dent, 2013, 22(4):399-405.
8. Tashiro T, Kurosawa H, Kawakami A, et al. Influence of medial hamstring tendon harvest on knee flexor strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction:a detailed evaluation with comparison of single- and double-tendon harvest. Am J Sports Med, 2003, 31(4):522-529.
9. Dalury DF, Dennis DA. Extensor mechanism problems following total knee replacement. J Knee Surg, 2003, 16(2):118-122.
10. Bobyn JD, Poggie RE, Krygier JJ, et al. Clinical validation of a structural porous tantalum biomaterial for adult reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2004, 86-A Suppl 2:123-129.
11. Cohen R. A porous tantalum trabecular metal. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 2002, 31(4):216-217.
12. Balla VK, Bodhak S, Bose S, et al. Porous tantalum structures for bone implants:Fabrication, mechanical and in vitro biological properties. Acta Biomater, 2010, 6(8):3349-3359.
13. Sinclair SK, Konz GJ, Dawson JM, et al. Host bone response to polyetheretherketone versus porous tantalum implants for cervical spinal fusion in a goat model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2012, 37(10):571-580.
14. Shuler MS, Rooks MD, Roberson JR. Porous tantalum implant in early steonecrosis of the hip:preliminary report on operative, survival, and outcomes results. J Arthroplasty, 2007, 22(1):26-31.
15. Reach JS Jr, Dickey ID, Zobitz ME, et al. Direct tendon attachment and healing to porous tantalum:An experimental animal study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2007, 89(5):1000-1009.
16. Holt GE, Christie MJ, Schwartz HS. Trabecular metal endoprosthetic limb salvage reconstruction of the lower limb. J Arthroplasty, 2009, 24(7):1079-1085.
17. Jonitz A, Lochner K, Lindner T, et al. Oxygen consumption, acidification and migration capacity of human primary osteoblasts withina three-dimensional tantalum scaffold. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2011, 22(9):2089-2095.
18. Mrosek EH, Schagemann JC, Chung HW, et al. Porous tantalum and poly-epsilon-caprolactone biocomposites for osteochondral defect repair:preliminary studies in rabbits. J Orthop Res, 2010, 28(2):141-148.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTIC AND BIOCOMPATIBILITY EVALUATION OF POROUS TANTALUM IMPLANTED INTO RABBIT PATELLAR TENDON

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content