Differences in ceramic-bone interface between surface-active ceramics and resorbable ceramics: a study by scanning and transmission electron microscopy
- PMID: 1569117
- DOI: 10.1002/jbm.820260210
Differences in ceramic-bone interface between surface-active ceramics and resorbable ceramics: a study by scanning and transmission electron microscopy
Abstract
The interface between bioactive ceramics and bone was studied by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The materials were apatite-wollastonite-containing glass ceramic (A-W.GC) as a representative surface-active ceramic, and calcite and beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP) as resorbable ceramics. Particles of these materials, ranging between about 100 microns and 300 microns in diameter, were implanted into rat tibiae, and specimens were prepared for observation at 8 weeks after implantation. Both SEM and TEM demonstrated that A-W.GC was bonded to bone through a thin Ca-P-rich layer consisting of fine apatite crystals apparently different from those of bone in shape, size, and orientation. Collagen fibers of the bone reached the surface of this layer, and chemical bonding between A-W.GC and the bone was speculated. Calcite and beta-TCP, on the other hand, made direct contact with the bone, and no apatite layer was present at the interface. The surfaces of the implants became rough due to degradation, and bone grew into the finest surface irregularities. However, we were unable to demonstrate any continuity of crystals between the resorbable implants and bone by high-resolution TEM. Accordingly, the bonding strength was considered to be mainly attributable to mechanical interlocking.
Similar articles
-
Apatite formation on three kinds of bioactive material at an early stage in vivo: a comparative study by transmission electron microscopy.J Biomed Mater Res. 1993 Aug;27(8):999-1006. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820270805. J Biomed Mater Res. 1993. PMID: 8408128
-
A comparative study of ultrastructures of the interfaces between four kinds of surface-active ceramic and bone.J Biomed Mater Res. 1992 Nov;26(11):1419-32. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820261103. J Biomed Mater Res. 1992. PMID: 1447227
-
Ultrastructural study of the A-W GC-bone interface after long-term implantation in rat and human bone.J Biomed Mater Res. 1994 Mar;28(3):365-72. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820280311. J Biomed Mater Res. 1994. PMID: 8077251
-
Bioactive calcium pyrophosphate glasses and glass-ceramics.Acta Biomater. 2005 Jan;1(1):55-64. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2004.08.001. Acta Biomater. 2005. PMID: 16701780 Review.
-
Ultrastructure of the bone-cement and the bone-metal interface.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992 Mar;(276):147-56. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992. PMID: 1537145 Review.
Cited by
-
Fabrication and Characterization of a Nanofast Cement for Dental Restorations.Biomed Res Int. 2021 Sep 9;2021:7343147. doi: 10.1155/2021/7343147. eCollection 2021. Biomed Res Int. 2021. PMID: 34540997 Free PMC article.
-
Fabrication of nano-macroporous glass-ceramic bioscaffold with a water soluble pore former.J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2012 Feb;23(2):307-14. doi: 10.1007/s10856-011-4466-5. Epub 2011 Nov 1. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2012. PMID: 22042462
-
Impartation of hydroxyapatite formation ability to ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene by deposition of apatite nuclei.IET Nanobiotechnol. 2020 Oct;14(8):673-679. doi: 10.1049/iet-nbt.2020.0050. IET Nanobiotechnol. 2020. PMID: 33108323 Free PMC article.
-
Resolving the CaP-bone interface: a review of discoveries with light and electron microscopy.Biomatter. 2012 Jan-Mar;2(1):15-23. doi: 10.4161/biom.20062. Biomatter. 2012. PMID: 23507782 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Electronic states spectroscopy of hydroxyapatite ceramics.J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2007 May;18(5):865-70. doi: 10.1007/s10856-006-0080-3. Epub 2007 Jan 9. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2007. PMID: 17211721
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous