Poly(2-Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate) Biomimetic Coating to Improve Osseointegration of a PMMA/HA/Glass Composite Implant: In vivo Mechanical and Histomorphometric Assessments
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2004
Poly(2-Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate) Biomimetic Coating to Improve Osseointegration of a PMMA/HA/Glass Composite Implant: In vivo Mechanical and Histomorphometric Assessments
Bone implants must simultaneously satisfy many requirements, even though the surface properties remain a crucial aspect in osseointegration success. Since a single material with a uniform structure cannot satisfy all of these requirements, composite materials specifically designed for orthopedic or dental implant application should be envisaged. Two poly(methyl-methacrylate)/hydroxyapatite composites reinforced by E-glass fibres, uncoated (PMMA/HA/Glass) and poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (PMMA/HA/Glass+pHEMA) coated by the biomimetic method, were mechanically (push-out test) and histomorphometrically (Affinity Index, AI) investigated in an in vivo rabbit model. Cylindrical implants (ø 2 mm × 5 mm length) were inserted into rabbit femoral cortical (mid-diaphysis) and cancellous (distal epiphysis) bone, under general anesthesia. The highest values of push-out force and ultimate shear strength were observed for the PMMA/HA/Glass at 12 weeks, which significantly (p < 0.001) differed from those of PMMA/HA/Glass+pHEMA at the same experimental time and from those of PMMA/HA/Glass at 4 weeks. At both experimental times, significantly (p < 0.0005) lower values of AI were observed in the PMMA/HA/Glass+pHEMA versus PMMA/HA/Glass (distal femoral epiphysis: 4 weeks = 33%; 12 weeks = 19%; femoral diaphysis: 4 weeks = 15%; 12 weeks = 11%). The good mechanical and histomorphometric results obtained with PMMA/HA/Glass should be followed by further evaluation of bone remodeling processes and mechanical strength around loaded PMMA/HA/Glass implants at longer experimental times. Finally, the biomimetic method applied to pHEMA needs to be further investigated in order to improve the positive effect of SBF on pHEMA and to enhance the coating adhesion.
WangK.. The use of titanium for medical applications in the USA.Mat Sci Eng A-Struct1996; 213: 134–7.
2.
SteinemannS.G.. Titanium alloys as metallic biomaterials, Titanium Science and Technology Proceeding of the Fifth International Conference on Titanium, Vol. 2, Munich, 1984: 1327–34.
3.
van der VoetG.B., MaraniE., TioS., de WolffF.A.. Aluminum neurotoxicity. In: GraumannW., DrukkerJ., eds. Progress in histochemistry and cytochemistry. Histo- and cytochemistry as a tool in environmental toxicity.Stuttgart, Gustav Fischer Verlag1991; 23: 235–42.
4.
NishigichiS., KatoH., FujitaH., OkaM., KimH.M., KokuboT., NakamuraT.. Titanium metals form direct bonding to bone after alkali and heat treatments.Biomaterials2001; 22: 2525–33.
5.
NiinomiM., Mechanical properties of biomedical titanium alloys.Mater Sci Eng A-Struct1998; 243: 231–6.
6.
RoccaM., OrientiL., SteaS., MoroniA., FiniM., GiardinoR.. Comparison among three different biocoatings for orthopaedic prostheses. An experimental animal study.Int J Artif Organs1998; 21: 553–8.
7.
FiniM., Nicoli AldiniN., GandolfiM.G., Mattioli BelmonteM., GiavaresiG., ZucchiniC., De BenedittisA., AmatiS., RavaglioliA., KrayewskiA., RoccaM., GuzzardellaG.A., BiaginiG., GiardinoR.. Biomaterials for orthopedic surgery in osteoporotic bone: A comparative study in osteopenic rats.Int J Artif Organs1997; 20: 291–7.
8.
GutteridgeD.L., Reinforcement of poly(methylmethacrylate) with ultra-high-modulus polyethylene fibre.J Dent1992; 20: 50–4.
9.
LadizeskyN.H., ChengY.Y., ChowT.W.. Acrylic resin reinforcement with chopped high performance polyethylene fiber-properties and denture construction.Dent Mater1993; 9: 128–35.
10.
MousaW.F., Kobayashi, ShinzatoS., KamimuraM., NeoM., YoshiaraS., NakamuraT.. Biological and biomechanical properties of PMMA-based bioactive bone cements.Biomaterials2000; 21: 2137–46.
11.
ValloC.I., MontemartiniP.E., FanovichM.A., Porto LopezJ.M., CuadratoT.. Polymethyl Methacrylate-based bone cement modified with hydroxyapatite.J Biomed Mater Res1999; 48: 150–8.
12.
BonfieldW.. Composites for bone replacement.J Biomed Eng1988; 10: 522–6.
13.
MeffertR.M.. Do implant surfaces make a difference?Curr Opin Periodontol1997; 4: 104–8.
14.
BauerT.W., SchilsJ.. The pathology of total joint arthoplastry I. Mechanism of implant fixation.Skeletal Radiol1999; 28: 423–32.
15.
FiniM., GiavaresiG., AldiniN.N., TorricelliP., BotterR., BerutoD., GiardinoR.. A bone substitute composed of poly-methylmethacrylate and alpha-tricalcium phosphate: Results in terms of osteoblast function and bone tissue formation.Biomaterials2002; 23: 4523–31.
16.
KwonS.W., KimY.S., WooY.K., KimmS.S., ParkJ.B.. Hydroxyapatite impregnated bone cement: In vitro and in vivo study.Biomed Mater Eng1997; 7: 129–40.
17.
RefojoM.F.. Permeation of water through some hydrogels.J Appl Polym Sci1965; 9: 3417–26.
18.
KiremitciM., PiskinE.. Properties of new sorbents containing activated carbon-PHEMA-PEG.Int J Artif Organs1985; 8: 201–8.
19.
DenizliA., PiskinE., DixitV., ArthurM., GitnickG.. Collagen and fibronectin immobilization on PHEMA microcarriers for hepatocyte attachment.Int J Artif Organs1995; 18: 90–5.
20.
MoreauM.F., GalloisY., BasleM.F., ChappardD.. Gamma irradiation of human bone allografts alters medullary lipids and releases toxic compounds for osteoblast-like cells.Biomaterials2000; 21: 369–76.
21.
FilmonR., Retailleau-GaboritN., GrizonF., GalloyerM., CincuC., BasleM.F., ChappardD.. Non-connected versus interconnected macroscoporosity in poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) polymers. An X-ray microtomographic and histomorphometric study.J Biomater Sci Polymer Edn2002; 13: 1105–17.
22.
FilmonR., BasléM.F., BarbierA., ChappardD.. Poly(2-hydroxy ethyl methacrylate)-alkaline phosphatase: A composite biomaterial allowing in vitro studies of bisphosphonates on the mineralization process.J Biomater Sci Polymer Edn2000; 11: 849–68.
23.
YuknaR.A.. Clinical evaluation of HTR polymer bone replacement grafts in human mandibular Class II molar furcations.J Periodontol1994; 65: 342–9.
24.
AshmanA., BruinsP.. A new immediate hard tissue replacement (HTR) for bone in the oral cavity.J Oral Implantol1982; 10: 419–52.
25.
YuknaR.A., Sayed-SuleymanA., FinleyJ.M., HochstedlerJ., MayerE.T.. Use of HTR synthetic bone grafts in conjunction with immediate dental implants.Compend Contin Educ Dent2003; 24: 649–52.
26.
AshmanA., LopintoJ.. Placement of implants into ridges grafted with bioplant HTR synthetic bone: Histological long-term case history reports.J Oral Implantol2000; 26: 276–90.
27.
NettiP.A., SheltonJ.C., RevellP.A., PirieC., SmithS., AmbrosioL., NicolaisL., BonfieldW.. Hydrogels as an interface between bone and an implant.Biomaterials1993; 14: 1098–104.
28.
BrandaF., CostantiniA., LaudisioG., BuriA., AmbrosioL.. Hydroxyapatite coating of poly(2-hydroxyehtyl methacrylate) hydrogel by biomimetic method.J Mater Sci1999; 34: 1319–22.
29.
AmbrosioL., De SantisR., NicolaisL., RimondiniL.. Impianto dentale in materiale composito. Italian Patent: RM2001A000705 del 29/11/ 2001.
30.
HenchL.L.. Bioceramics from concept to clinic.J Am Ceram Soc1991; 74: 1487–510.
31.
DhertW.J.A., JansenJ.A.. The validity of a single pushout test. In: AnY.H., DraughnR.A., eds. Mechanical testing of bone and the bone-implant interface.Boca Raton, Florida USA: CRC Press LLC; 2000. pp. 477–88.
32.
VallittuP.K.. Acrylic resin-fiber composite-Part II: The effect of fiber concentration on fracture resistance.J Prosthet Dent1994; 71: 613–7.
33.
LadizeskyN.H., ChengY.Y., ChowT.M.. Reinforcement of complete denture bases with continous high performance polymer fibers.J Prosthet Dent1992; 68: 934–43.
34.
VallittuP.K., LassilaV.P., LappalainenR.. Transverse strength and fatigue of denture acrylic-glass fiber composite.Dent Mater1994; 10: 116–21.
35.
AustinA.T., BaskerR.M.. The level of residual monomer in acrylic denture base materials.Br Dent J1980; 149: 281–6.
36.
HonorezP., CatalanA., AngnesU., GrimonsterJ.. The effect of three processing cicles on some phisical and chemical properties of a heat-cured acrylic resin.J Prosthet Dent1989; 61: 510–17.
37.
KokuboT.. A/W glass-ceramic: Processing and properties. In: HenchL.L., WilsonJ., eds. Introduction to bioceramics.Singapore: World Scientific, 1993: pp. 75–88.
38.
HenchL.L., PaschallH.A.. Direct chemical bond of bioactive glass-ceramic materials to bone and muscle.J Biomed Mater Res1973; 7: 25–42.
GiavaresiG., AmbrosioL., BattistonG.A., CasellatoU., GerbasiR., FiniM., AldiniN.N., MartiniL., RimondiniL., GiardinoR.. Histomorphometric, ultrastructural and microhardness evaluation of the osseointegration of a nanostructured titanium oxide coating by metal-organic chemical vapour deposition: An in vivo study.Biomaterials2004; 25: 5583–91.
41.
BanS., MarunoS., ArimotoN., HaradaA., HasegawaJ.. Effect of electrochemically deposited apatite coating on bonding of bone to the HA-G-Ti composite and titanium.J Biomed Mater Res1997; 36: 9–15.
42.
BrandaF., CostantiniA., LucianiG., AmbrosioL.. Improvement of swelling properties of PHEMA hydrogel by means of the biomimetic method.J Biomed Mater Res2001; 57: 79–83.
