Comparative Study of the Osseointegration of 3D-printed and Plasma-coated Titanium Implants

Overview

Journal World J Orthop

Publisher Baishideng Publishing Group

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2023 Sep 25

PMID 37744721

Authors

Stanislav Bondarenko

Volodymyr Filipenko

Nataliya Ashukina

Valentyna Maltseva

Gennadiy Ivanov

Iurii Lazarenko

Dmytro Sereda

Ran Schwarzkopf

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Total hip arthroplasty is a common surgical treatment for elderly patients with osteoporosis, particularly in postmenopausal women. In such cases, highly porous acetabular components are a favorable option in achieving osseointegration. However, further discussion is needed if use of such acetabular components is justified under the condition of normal bone mass.

Aim: To determine the features of osseointegration of two different types of titanium implants [3-dimensional (3D)-printed and plasma-coated titanium implants] in bone tissue of a distal metaphysis in a rat femur model.

Methods: This study was performed on 20 white male laboratory rats weighing 300-350 g aged 6 mo. Rats were divided into two groups of 10 animals, which had two different types of implants were inserted into a hole defect (2 × 3 mm) in the distal metaphysis of the femur: Group I: 3D-printed titanium implant (highly porous); Group II: Plasma-coated titanium implant. After 45 and 90 d following surgery, the rats were sacrificed, and their implanted femurs were extracted for histological examination. The relative perimeter (%) of bone trabeculae [bone-implant contact (BIC%)] and bone marrow surrounding the titanium implants was measured.

Results: Trabecular bone tissue was formed on the 45 day after implantation around the implants regardless of their type. 45 d after surgery, group I (3D-printed titanium implant) and group II (plasma-coated titanium implant) did not differ in BIC% (83.51 ± 8.5 84.12 ± 1 .73; = 0.838). After 90 d, the BIC% was higher in group I (87.04 ± 6.99 81.24 ± 7.62; = 0.049), compared to group II. The relative perimeter of the bone marrow after 45 d did not differ between groups and was 16.49% ± 8.58% for group I, and 15.88% ± 1.73% for group II. Futhermore, after 90 d, in group I the relative perimeter of bone marrow was 1.4 times smaller (12.96 ± 6.99 18.76 ± 7.62; = 0.049) compared to the relative perimeter of bone marrow in group II.

Conclusion: The use of a highly porous titanium implant, manufactured with 3D printing, for acetabular components provides increased osseointegration compared to a plasma-coated titanium implant.

Citing Articles

Synthetic Nanopillars for Stimulating Osteoblast Activity and Osteointegration in Bone-Related Disorders.

Liang W, Zhou C, Liu X, Xie Q, Xia L, Li Q Int J Nanomedicine. 2025; 20:2205-2223.

PMID: 39990287 PMC: 11847438. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S501963.

Applying 3D-printed prostheses to reconstruct critical-sized bone defects of tibial diaphysis (> 10 cm) caused by osteomyelitis and aseptic non-union.

Liu B, Wang L, Li X, Chen Z, Hou G, Zhou F J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):418.

PMID: 39033286 PMC: 11264997. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04926-2.

References

Ryu D, Jung A, Ban H, Kwak T, Shin E, Gweon B . Enhanced osseointegration through direct energy deposition porous coating for cementless orthopedic implant fixation. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):22317. PMC: 8595809. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01739-9. View

Chen H, Han Q, Wang C, Liu Y, Chen B, Wang J . Porous Scaffold Design for Additive Manufacturing in Orthopedics: A Review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020; 8:609. PMC: 7311579. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00609. View

Hanawa T . Titanium-Tissue Interface Reaction and Its Control With Surface Treatment. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019; 7:170. PMC: 6650641. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00170. View

Lindgren V, Galea V, Nebergall A, Greene M, Rolfson O, Malchau H . Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Porous Titanium-Coated and Plasma-Sprayed Acetabular Shells: A Five-Year Prospective Multicenter Study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018; 100(19):1673-1681. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.17.00729. View

Berend K, Adams J, Morris M, Lombardi Jr A . Three-Year Results with a Ringless Third-Generation Porous Plasma Sprayed Acetabular Component in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2017; 30:295-299. View

Levin M, Spiro R, Jain H, Falk M . Effects of Titanium Implant Surface Topology on Bone Cell Attachment and Proliferation in vitro. Med Devices (Auckl). 2022; 15:103-119. PMC: 9056099. DOI: 10.2147/MDER.S360297. View

MacBarb R, Lindsey D, Bahney C, Woods S, Wolfe M, Yerby S . Fortifying the Bone-Implant Interface Part 1: An In Vitro Evaluation of 3D-Printed and TPS Porous Surfaces. Int J Spine Surg. 2017; 11:15. PMC: 5537982. DOI: 10.14444/4015. View

Malahias M, Kostretzis L, Greenberg A, Nikolaou V, Atrey A, Sculco P . Highly Porous Titanium Acetabular Components in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review. J Arthroplasty. 2020; 35(6):1737-1749. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.01.052. View

Karachalios T, Koutalos A, Komnos G . Total hip arthroplasty in patients with osteoporosis. Hip Int. 2019; 30(4):370-379. DOI: 10.1177/1120700019883244. View

10.

Bondarenko S, Ashukina N, Maltseva V, Ivanov G, Badnaoui A, Schwarzkopf R . Evaluation of the bone morphology around four types of porous metal implants placed in distal femur of ovariectomized rats. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020; 15(1):296. PMC: 7398357. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-020-01822-3. View

11.

Saldana L, Gonzalez-Carrasco J, Rodriguez M, Munuera L, Vilaboa N . Osteoblast response to plasma-spray porous Ti6Al4V coating on substrates of identical alloy. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2006; 77(3):608-17. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.30671. View

12.

DallAva L, Hothi H, Henckel J, Di Laura A, Tirabosco R, Eskelinen A . Osseointegration of retrieved 3D-printed, off-the-shelf acetabular implants. Bone Joint Res. 2021; 10(7):388-400. PMC: 8333029. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.107.BJR-2020-0462.R1. View

13.

Stubinger S, Mosch I, Robotti P, Sidler M, Klein K, Ferguson S . Histological and biomechanical analysis of porous additive manufactured implants made by direct metal laser sintering: a pilot study in sheep. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013; 101(7):1154-63. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.32925. View

14.

Tsikandylakis G, Mortensen K, Gromov K, Troelsen A, Malchau H, Mohaddes M . The Use of Porous Titanium Coating and the Largest Possible Head Do Not Affect Early Cup Fixation: A 2-Year Report from a Randomized Controlled Trial. JB JS Open Access. 2020; 5(4). PMC: 7757840. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00107. View

15.

Wiznia D, Schwarzkopf R, Iorio R, Long W . Factors That Influence Bone-Ingrowth Fixation of Press-Fit Acetabular Cups. JBJS Rev. 2019; 7(6):e2. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.18.00147. View

16.

PRENTICE A . Autofluorescence of bone tissues. J Clin Pathol. 1967; 20(5):717-9. PMC: 473558. DOI: 10.1136/jcp.20.5.717. View

17.

Zhang H, Lewis C, Aronow M, Gronowicz G . The effects of patient age on human osteoblasts' response to Ti-6Al-4V implants in vitro. J Orthop Res. 2003; 22(1):30-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0736-0266(03)00155-4. View

18.

Shin T, Lim D, Kim Y, Kim S, Jo W, Lim Y . The biological response to laser-aided direct metal-coated Titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V). Bone Joint Res. 2018; 7(5):357-361. PMC: 5987684. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.75.BJR-2017-0222.R1. View

19.

Yoshino K, Tsukeoka T, Tsuneizumi Y, Lee T, Nakamura J, Suzuki M . Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Cementless Cup Supporter and Iliac Autograft: A Minimum of 15-Year Follow-Up. J Arthroplasty. 2017; 32(11):3495-3501. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.06.026. View

20.

Canciani E, Ragone V, Biffi C, Valenza F, DAmbrosi R, Olimpo M . Understanding the Role of Surface Modification of Randomized Trabecular Titanium Structures in Bone Tissue Regeneration: An Experimental Study. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022; 58(2). PMC: 8879828. DOI: 10.3390/medicina58020315. View