In vitro and in vivo assessment of bone-implant interface: A comparative study

A. De Benedittis, M. Mattioli-Belmonte, A. Krajewski, M. Fini, A. Ravaglioli, R. Giardino, G. Biagini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The present in vitro and in vivo comparison of three bioactive (HA, AP40, RKKP) and three bioinert (Ti6-Al4-V, Al2O3, ZrO2) materials was undertaken to identify which of them provide(s) the most suitable coating for prostheses implanted in patients with altered metabolic status. The experimental design included in vitro tests with human osteoblasts and morphological observations by scanning electron microscopy. For the in vivo evaluation, the materials were implanted in the femoral condyle of ovariectomised and intact female rats, and two months after surgery an X-ray microanalytical study was performed. The in vitro study showed good biocompatibility with all materials. Microanalysis evidenced a similar behaviour with all materials except the two biological glasses. The differences in Ca and P content observed between intact and ovariectomised rats can be explained by the intrinsic capability of biological glasses to undergo surface modifications in the presence of alterations of the bone metabolism. Thus, their use seems to be indicated in recipients with osteoporotic pathologies.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)516-521
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Artificial Organs
Volume22
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - 1999

Keywords

  • Biological glass
  • Ceramic
  • Implant coatings
  • Microanalysis
  • Osteoporosis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'In vitro and in vivo assessment of bone-implant interface: A comparative study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    De Benedittis, A., Mattioli-Belmonte, M., Krajewski, A., Fini, M., Ravaglioli, A., Giardino, R., & Biagini, G. (1999). In vitro and in vivo assessment of bone-implant interface: A comparative study. International Journal of Artificial Organs, 22(7), 516-521.