Tissue reaction to alumina implants inserted into the tibiae of rats

Abstract

We examined the tissue reaction to three alumina implants--single-crystal alumina (SA), dense polycrystal alumina (DPA), and porous polycrystal alumina (PPA)--inserted transcortically, extending into the medullary canal of rat tibiae, and assessed the quantitative differences in bone reaction using an image processing system. There was no difference in the degree of maturation of newly formed bone around the three kinds of alumina. SA and DPA were encapsulated with a continuous bone layer, but some bone tissue was attached focally around PPA. Bone trabeculae in the control site diminished in size and number chronologically. Multinucleated giant cells were observed on the surface of DPA and PPA, but not on SA. Tabulation of the quantitative evaluation indicated that SA showed the highest, DPA a lower, and PPA the lowest in bone contact rate, bone contact thickness, and bone contact area. These data suggest that SA is superior to the other two as an implant material.

Structural variants of biodegradable polyesterurethane in vivo evoke a cellular and angiogenic response that is dictated by architecture

“…The presence of fibrocytes around an implanted material also suggest that the scaffold is isolated from the surrounding tissue [41][42][43] .…”

An Ultrastructural Study of the Bone-titanium Interface Using Pure Titanium-coated Plastic and Pure Titanium Rod Implants.

“…This period was selected because we and other investigators had previously pointed out that bone came in contact with the titanium within three [8] or four weeks [12], while, in addition, in another study using alumina implants, the bone around the implant was found to almost completely form by 28 days [22].…”

“…The guidelines for animal experiments of Kyushu University were strictly observed regarding the treatment of all animals. The method for implantation has been described in detail elsewhere [22] . Briefly, under systemic anesthesia (50 mg/kg), both tibiae were exposed, and holes, measuring the same size as the implants, were made 10 mm below the knee joint.…”

“…Therefore, it is considered to be important to confirm whether or not the amorphous layer (zone) really contains GAGs. Thus, the aims of the present study are 1) to ultrastructurally observe the interface, in particular the amorphous zone, between the bone and coated titanium in 6-week-old rats on the 28th day after the insertion of the titanium (the use of these rats is based on the data obtained from previous studies [8,12,22] in which the bone-implant contact was found to reach a maximum on the 28th day), 2) to identify the presence of the ruthenium red-positive amorphous zone, and 3) to compare the differences between the bone-coated titanium interface and the bone-titanium rod interface.…”

Use of an intramedullary in vivo model to study bone formation and maintenance in ceramic porous domains

“…Stable equilibria of bone in contact with alumina implants have been suggested previously. 24,25 Griss et al 24 inserted solid alumina implants into rat femurs for up to 70 weeks and found that, after the initial formation of mature lamellar bone around the implants, the bone remained in situ. Significantly, although there was evidence of continual remodeling, the bone did not undergo any further significant changes in terms of the amount and type of bone tissue lining the implants, suggesting that it had reached a final equilibrium.…”