Morphometric and mechanical evaluation of titanium implant integration: Comparison of five surface structures

M. Svehla, P. Morberg, B. Zicat, W. Bruce, D. Sonnabend, W. R. Walsh*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

132 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Achieving a stable bone-implant interface is an important factor in the long-term outcome of joint arthroplasty. In this study, we employed an ovine bicortical model to compare the bone-healing response to five different surfaces on titanium alloy implants: grit blasted (GB), grit blasted plus hydroxyapatite (50 μm thick) coating (GBHA), Porocoat® (PC), Porocoat® with HA (PCHA) and smooth (S). Push-out testing, histology, and backscatter scanning electron microscope (SEM) imaging were employed to assess the healing response at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Push-out testing revealed PC and PCHA surfaces resulted in significantly greater mechanical fixation over all other implant types at all time points (p <. 05). HA coating on the grit-blasted surface significantly improved fixation at 8 and 12 weeks (p < .05). The addition of HA onto the porous coating did not significantly improve fixation in this model. Quantification of ingrowth/ongrowth from SEM images revealed that HA coating of the grit-blasted surfaces resulted in significantly more ongrowth at 4 weeks (p < .05). (C) 2000 John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)15-22
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Biomedical Materials Research
Volume51
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Bone
  • Hydroxyapatite
  • Ingrowth/ongrowth
  • Porous surface
  • Push-out

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Morphometric and mechanical evaluation of titanium implant integration: Comparison of five surface structures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this