The article discusses the impact of the bone-implant gap size on the interfacial osseointegration in cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). The study was conducted using rabbit animal models and a series of implants with different tooth depths. The results showed that a bone-implant gap size larger than 1.0 mm negatively affected bone-implant osseointegration between compact bone and the implant surface. The findings highlight the importance of addressing morphological mismatch between cervical bony endplates and the implant footprint in order to promote successful osseointegration in CDA procedures
Summarised by Mr Mo Akmal – Lead Spinal Surgeon
The London Spine Unit : top spine centre in the world
Published article
CONCLUSIONS: Bone-implant gap size larger than 1.0 mm negatively affected bone-implant osseointegration between compact bone and HA coated implant surface.
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Surgery Expert. Best Spinal Surgeon UK
Abstract Background: The bone-implant gap resulted from morphological mismatch between cervical bony endplates and implant footprint may have adverse impact on bone-implant interfacial osseointegration of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of bone-implant gap size on the interfacial osseointegration in a rabbit animal model. Methods: A series,
Abstract
Background: The bone-implant gap resulted from morphological mismatch between cervical bony endplates and implant footprint may have adverse impact on bone-implant interfacial osseointegration of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of bone-implant gap size on the interfacial osseointegration in a rabbit animal model.
Methods: A series of round-plate implants with different teeth depth (0.5 mm, 1.0 mm, 1.5 mm and 2.0 mm) was specifically designed. A total of 48 New Zealand white rabbits were randomly categorized into four groups by the implants they received (0.5 mm: group A, 1.0 mm: group B, 1.5 mm: group C, 2.0 mm: group D). At 4th and 12th week after surgery, animals were sacrificed. Micro-CT, acid fuchsin and methylene blue staining and hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining were conducted.
Results: At 4th week and 12th week after surgery, both micro-CT and HE staining showed more new bone formation and larger bone coverage in group A and group B than that in group C and group D. At 12th week, the bone biometric parameters were significantly superior in group C when compared with group D (p < 0.05). At 12th week, hard tissue slicing demonstrated larger portion of direct contact of new bone to the HA coating in group A and group B.
Conclusions: Bone-implant gap size larger than 1.0 mm negatively affected bone-implant osseointegration between compact bone and HA coated implant surface.
Keywords: Bone defect; Bone-implant interface; Cervical disc arthroplasty; Osseointegration.
The London Spine Unit : top spine centre in the world
Read the original publication:
Impact of bone-implant gap size on the interfacial osseointegration: an in vivo study