Reconstruction of the Acetabular Bone Defect by the Individualized Three-Dimensional Printed Porous Augment in a Swine Model

Overview

Journal Biomed Res Int

Publisher Wiley

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Biotechnology
General Medicine

Date 2020 Dec 18

PMID 33335923

Citations 2

Authors

Jun Fu

Yi Xiang

Ming Ni

Xiaojuan Qu

Yonggang Zhou

Libo Hao

Guoqiang Zhang

Jiying Chen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Methods: As an acetabular bone defect model created in Bama miniswine, an augment individually fabricated by 3D print technique with Ti6Al4V powders was implanted to repair the defect. Nine swine were divided into three groups, including the immediate biomechanics group, 12-week biomechanics group, and 12-week histological group. The inner structural parameters of the 3D printed porous augment were measured by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), including porosity, pore size, and trabecular diameter. The matching degree between the postoperative augment and the designed augment was assessed by CT scanning and 3D reconstruction. In addition, biomechanical properties, such as stiffness, compressive strength, and the elastic modulus of the 3D printed porous augment, were measured by means of a mechanical testing machine. Moreover, bone ingrowth and implant osseointegration were histomorphometrically assessed.

Results: In terms of the inner structural parameters of the 3D printed porous augment, the porosity was 55.48 ± 0.61%, pore size 319.23 ± 25.05 m, and trabecular diameter 240.10 ± 23.50 m. Biomechanically, the stiffness was 21464.60 ± 1091.69 N/mm, compressive strength 231.10 ± 11.77 MPa, and elastic modulus 5.35 ± 0.23 GPa, respectively. Furthermore, the matching extent between the postoperative augment and the designed one was up to 91.40 ± 2.83%. Besides, the maximal shear strength of the 3D printed augment was 929.46 ± 295.99 N immediately after implantation, whereas the strength was 1521.93 ± 98.38 N 12 weeks after surgery ( = 0.0302). The bone mineral apposition rate (m per day) 12 weeks post operation was 3.77 ± 0.93 m/d. The percentage bone volume of new bone was 22.30 ± 4.51% 12 weeks after surgery.

Conclusion: The 3D printed porous Ti6Al4V augment designed in this study was well biocompatible with bone tissue, possessed proper biomechanical features, and was anatomically well matched with the defect bone. Therefore, the 3D printed porous Ti6Al4V augment possesses great potential as an alternative for individualized treatment of severe acetabular bone defects.

Citing Articles

Strategies for promoting neurovascularization in bone regeneration.

Li X, Zhao Y, Miao L, An Y, Wu F, Han J Mil Med Res. 2025; 12(1):9.

PMID: 40025573 PMC: 11874146. DOI: 10.1186/s40779-025-00596-1.

Customized Additive Manufacturing in Bone Scaffolds-The Gateway to Precise Bone Defect Treatment.

Zhou J, See C, Sreenivasamurthy S, Zhu D Research (Wash D C). 2023; 6:0239.

PMID: 37818034 PMC: 10561823. DOI: 10.34133/research.0239.

Use of Customized 3D-Printed Titanium Augment With Tantalum Trabecular Cup for Large Acetabular Bone Defects in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Midterm Follow-Up Study.

Kong K, Zhao C, Chang Y, Qiao H, Hu Y, Li H Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022; 10:900905.

PMID: 35721851 PMC: 9198309. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.900905.

References

Heinl P, Muller L, Korner C, Singer R, Muller F . Cellular Ti-6Al-4V structures with interconnected macro porosity for bone implants fabricated by selective electron beam melting. Acta Biomater. 2008; 4(5):1536-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2008.03.013. View

Lal H, Patralekh M . 3D printing and its applications in orthopaedic trauma: A technological marvel. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018; 9(3):260-268. PMC: 6128305. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2018.07.022. View

Wang J, Yang M, Zhu Y, Wang L, Tomsia A, Mao C . Phage nanofibers induce vascularized osteogenesis in 3D printed bone scaffolds. Adv Mater. 2014; 26(29):4961-4966. PMC: 4122615. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201400154. View

Thomsen P, Malmstrom J, Emanuelsson L, Rene M, Snis A . Electron beam-melted, free-form-fabricated titanium alloy implants: Material surface characterization and early bone response in rabbits. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008; 90(1):35-44. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31250. View

Kujala S, Ryhanen J, Danilov A, Tuukkanen J . Effect of porosity on the osteointegration and bone ingrowth of a weight-bearing nickel-titanium bone graft substitute. Biomaterials. 2003; 24(25):4691-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(03)00359-4. View

Ponader S, von Wilmowsky C, Widenmayer M, Lutz R, Heinl P, Korner C . In vivo performance of selective electron beam-melted Ti-6Al-4V structures. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009; 92(1):56-62. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.32337. View

Kalantari S, Arabi H, Mirdamadi S, Mirsalehi S . Biocompatibility and compressive properties of Ti-6Al-4V scaffolds having Mg element. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015; 48:183-191. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.04.015. View

Wieding J, Wolf A, Bader R . Numerical optimization of open-porous bone scaffold structures to match the elastic properties of human cortical bone. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014; 37:56-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.05.002. View

Fu J, Ni M, Chen J, Li X, Chai W, Hao L . Reconstruction of Severe Acetabular Bone Defect with 3D Printed Ti6Al4V Augment: A Finite Element Study. Biomed Res Int. 2018; 2018:6367203. PMC: 6261073. DOI: 10.1155/2018/6367203. View

10.

Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M . Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(4):780-5. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. View

11.

Ramakrishnaiah R, Al Kheraif A, Mohammad A, Divakar D, Kotha S, Celur S . Preliminary fabrication and characterization of electron beam melted Ti-6Al-4V customized dental implant. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2017; 24(4):787-796. PMC: 5415127. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2016.05.001. View

12.

Shon W, Santhanam S, Choi J . Acetabular Reconstruction in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Hip Pelvis. 2016; 28(1):1-14. PMC: 4972873. DOI: 10.5371/hp.2016.28.1.1. View

13.

Sporer S, Paprosky W . The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects. J Arthroplasty. 2006; 21(6 Suppl 2):83-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.008. View

14.

Whitehouse M, Masri B, Duncan C, Garbuz D . Continued good results with modular trabecular metal augments for acetabular defects in hip arthroplasty at 7 to 11 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 473(2):521-7. PMC: 4294936. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3861-x. View

15.

Fernandez-Fairen M, Murcia A, Blanco A, Merono A, Murcia Jr A, Ballester J . Revision of failed total hip arthroplasty acetabular cups to porous tantalum components: a 5-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 25(6):865-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.07.027. View

16.

Honigmann P, Sharma N, Okolo B, Popp U, Msallem B, Thieringer F . Patient-Specific Surgical Implants Made of 3D Printed PEEK: Material, Technology, and Scope of Surgical Application. Biomed Res Int. 2018; 2018:4520636. PMC: 5884234. DOI: 10.1155/2018/4520636. View

17.

Palmquist A, Snis A, Emanuelsson L, Browne M, Thomsen P . Long-term biocompatibility and osseointegration of electron beam melted, free-form-fabricated solid and porous titanium alloy: experimental studies in sheep. J Biomater Appl. 2011; 27(8):1003-16. DOI: 10.1177/0885328211431857. View

18.

Swaminathan V, Gilbert J . Fretting corrosion of CoCrMo and Ti6Al4V interfaces. Biomaterials. 2012; 33(22):5487-503. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.04.015. View

19.

Paprosky W, Perona P, Lawrence J . Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994; 9(1):33-44. DOI: 10.1016/0883-5403(94)90135-x. View

20.

Cuckler J . Management strategies for acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002; 17(4 Suppl 1):153-6. DOI: 10.1054/arth.2002.32811. View