Development of a Soft Tissue Seal Around Bone-anchored Transcutaneous Amputation Prostheses
Overview
Affiliations
Conventional amputation prosthetics are problematic because they rely on the stump-socket interface for attachment. Intraosseous transcutaneous amputation prostheses (ITAP) could solve these problems; however they rely on the integrity of the soft tissue-implant interface as a barrier to exogenous agents, and in the prevention of downgrowth and marsupilisation. We have used an in vivo animal model to study the soft tissue interfaces around bone-anchored transcutaneous implants. We hypothesise that by facilitating and increasing the area of dermal attachment to the implant epithelial down-growth will be reduced. A flange with a series of 24, 0.7 mm holes positioned immediately below the epithelium was used to increase dermal attachment. This significantly reduced downgrowth and optimised the integrity of the collagenous tissue-implant interface at the dermal level. We postulate that the flange reduces relative interfacial movement at the epithelium-implant interface by providing increased surface area for dermal tissue attachment. A tight seal at the dermal tissue level reduces the degree of downgrowth around ITAP, eliminating marsupilisation as a potential failure modality. Surface topography and coatings did not affect the degree of downgrowth or dermal attachment to straight or flanged implants. A significant negative correlation was observed between downgrowth and both epithelial and dermal attachment. This study shows that a soft tissue-implant interface capable of preventing downgrowth and marsupilisation can develop around a bone-anchored transcutaneous implant, given the incorporation of a porous flange positioned in the dermal tissues immediately below the epithelium. This will benefit applications where bone-anchored transcutaneous implants are used.
Fearing B, Gitajn I, Romereim S, Hoellwarth J, Wenke J OTA Int. 2025; 8(1 Suppl):e367.
PMID: 40071166 PMC: 11892713. DOI: 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000367.
Shevtsov M, Pitkin E, Combs S, Meulen G, Preucil C, Pitkin M Nanomaterials (Basel). 2024; 14(18).
PMID: 39330641 PMC: 11434446. DOI: 10.3390/nano14181484.
Staehlke S, Barth T, Muench M, Schroeter J, Wendlandt R, Oldorf P J Funct Biomater. 2024; 15(2).
PMID: 38391887 PMC: 10889705. DOI: 10.3390/jfb15020034.
The safety of one-stage versus two-stage approach to osseointegrated prosthesis for limb amputation.
Banducci E, Al Muderis M, Lu W, Bested S Bone Jt Open. 2023; 4(7):539-550.
PMID: 37475711 PMC: 10359829. DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.47.BJO-2022-0117.R1.
Giusto E, Blunn G, Ferro de Godoy R, Liu C, Pendegrass C Biomater Transl. 2023; 3(4):243-249.
PMID: 36846509 PMC: 9947732. DOI: 10.12336/biomatertransl.2022.04.004.