4.4 Article

Mixed material wear particle isolation from periprosthetic tissue surrounding total joint replacements

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.35076

关键词

foreign body reactions (response); implant retrieval; total joint replacement; tribology; wear debris

资金

  1. EPSRC Doctoral Training Centre in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  2. York [EP/500513/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Submicron-sized wear particles are potential causes of aseptic loosening, and highly sensitive wear particle isolation methods can identify them but not all types of particles. By modifying established techniques, high- and low-density materials can be successfully isolated from periprosthetic tissue samples.
Submicron-sized wear particles are generally accepted as a potential cause of aseptic loosening when produced in sufficient volumes. With the accelerating use of increasingly wear-resistant biomaterials, identifying such particles and evaluating their biological response is becoming more challenging. Highly sensitive wear particle isolation methods have been developed but these methods cannot isolate the complete spectrum of particle types present in individual tissue samples. Two established techniques were modified to create one novel method to isolate both high- and low-density materials from periprosthetic tissue samples. Ten total hip replacement and eight total knee replacement tissue samples were processed. All particle types were characterized using high resolution scanning electron microscopy. UHMWPE and a range of high-density materials were isolated from all tissue samples, including: polymethylmethacrylate, zirconium dioxide, titanium alloy, cobalt chromium alloy and stainless steel. This feasibility study demonstrates the coexistence of mixed particle types in periprosthetic tissues and provides researchers with high-resolution images of clinically relevant wear particles that could be used as a reference for future in vitro biological response studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据