ABSTRACT
Osteoarthritis (OA) poses significant therapeutic challenges, particularly OA that affects the hand. Currently available treatment strategies are often limited in terms of their efficacy in managing pain, regulating invasiveness, and restoring joint function. The APRICOT® implant system developed by Aurora Medical Ltd (Chichester, UK) introduces a minimally invasive, bone-conserving approach for treating hand OA (https://apricot-project.eu/). By utilizing polycarbonate urethane (PCU), this implant incorporates a caterpillar track-inspired design to promote the restoration of natural movement to the joint. Surface modifications of PCU have been proposed for the biological fixation of the implant. This study investigated the biocompatibility of PCU alone or in combination with two surface modifications, namely dopamine-carboxymethylcellulose (dCMC) and calcium-phosphate (CaP) coatings. In a rat soft tissue model, native and CaP-coated PCU foils did not increase cellular migration or cytotoxicity at the implant-soft tissue interface after 3 d, showing gene expression of proinflammatory cytokines similar to that in non-implanted sham sites. However, dCMC induced an amplified initial inflammatory response that was characterized by increased chemotaxis and cytotoxicity, as well as pronounced gene activation of proinflammatory macrophages and neoangiogenesis. By 21 d, inflammation subsided in all the groups, allowing for implant encapsulation. In a rat bone model, 6 d and 28 d after release of the periosteum, all implant types were adapted to the bone surface with a surrounding fibrous capsule and no protracted inflammatory response was observed. These findings demonstrated the biocompatibility of native and CaP-coated PCU foils as components of APRICOT® implants. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Hand osteoarthritis treatments require materials that minimize irritation of the delicate finger joints. Differing from existing treatments, the APRICOT® implant leverages polycarbonate urethane (PCU) for minimally invasive joint replacement. This interdisciplinary, preclinical study investigated the biocompatibility of thin polycarbonate urethane (PCU) foils and their surface modifications with calcium-phosphate (CaP) or dopamine-carboxymethylcellulose (dCMC). Cellular and morphological analyses revealed that both native and Ca-P coated PCU elicit transient inflammation, similar to sham sites, and a thin fibrous encapsulation in soft tissues and on bone surfaces. However, dCMC surface modification amplified initial chemotaxis and cytotoxicity, with pronounced activation of proinflammatory and neoangiogenesis genes. Therefore, native and CaP-coated PCU possess sought-for biocompatible properties, crucial for patient safety and performance of APRICOT® implant.
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to compare bone healing and implant stability for three types of dental implants: a threaded implant, a three-dimensional (3D)-printed implant without spikes, and a 3D-printed implant with spikes. In four beagle dogs, left and right mandibular premolars (2nd, 3rd, and 4th) and 1st molars were removed. Twelve weeks later, three types of titanium implants (threaded implant, 3D-printed implant without spikes, and 3D-printed implant with spikes) were randomly inserted into the edentulous ridges of each dog. Implant stability measurements and radiographic recordings were taken every two weeks following implant placement. Twelve weeks after implant surgery, the dogs were sacrificed and bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupied (BAFO) were compared between groups. At implant surgery, the primary stability was lower for the 3D-printed implant with spikes (74.05 ± 5.61) than for the threaded implant (83.71 ± 2.90) (p = 0.005). Afterwards, no significant difference in implants' stability was observed between groups up to post-surgery week 12. Histomorphometrical analysis did not reveal a significant difference between the three implants for BIC (p = 0.101) or BAFO (p = 0.288). Within the limits of this study, 3D-printed implants without spikes and threaded implants showed comparable implant stability measurements, BIC, and BAFO.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study evaluated differences in bone healing and remodeling among 3 implants with different surfaces: sandblasting and large-grit acid etching (SLA; IS-III Active®), SLA with hydroxyapatite nanocoating (IS-III Bioactive®), and SLA stored in sodium chloride solution (SLActive®). METHODS: The mandibular second, third, and fourth premolars of 9 dogs were extracted. After 4 weeks, 9 dogs with edentulous alveolar ridges underwent surgical placement of 3 implants bilaterally and were allowed to heal for 2, 4, or 12 weeks. Histologic and histomorphometric analyses were performed on 54 stained slides based on the following parameters: vertical marginal bone loss at the buccal and lingual aspects of the implant (b-MBL and l-MBL, respectively), mineralized bone-to-implant contact (mBIC), osteoid-to-implant contact (OIC), total bone-to-implant contact (tBIC), mineralized bone area fraction occupied (mBAFO), osteoid area fraction occupied (OAFO), and total bone area fraction occupied (tBAFO) in the threads of the region of interest. Two-way analysis of variance (3 types of implant surface×3 healing time periods) and additional analyses for simple effects were performed. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed across the implant surfaces for OIC, mBIC, tBIC, OAFO, and tBAFO. Statistically significant differences were observed over time for l-MBL, mBIC, tBIC, mBAFO, and tBAFO. In addition, an interaction effect between the implant surface and the healing time period was observed for mBIC, tBIC, and mBAFO. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that implant surface wettability facilitates bone healing dynamics, which could be attributed to the improvement of early osseointegration. In addition, osteoblasts might become more activated with the use of HA-coated surface implants than with hydrophobic surface implants in the remodeling phase.
