Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
The long-term biological success of cementless orthopaedic prostheses is highly dependent on osteointegration. Pre-clinical testing of new cementless implant technology however, requires live animal testing, which has anatomical, loading, ethical and cost challenges. This proof-of-concept study aimed to develop an in vitro model to examine implant osteointegration under known loading/micromotion conditions.
Methods
Fresh cancellous bone cylinders (n=8) were harvested from porcine femur and implanted with additive manufactured porous titanium implants (Ø4 × 15 mm). To simulate physiological conditions, n=3 bone cylinders were tested in a bioreactor system with a cyclic 30 µm displacement at 1Hz for 300 cycles every day for 15 days in a total of 21 days culture. The chamber was also perfused with culture medium using a peristaltic pump. Control bone cylinders were cultured under static conditions (n=5). Samples were calcein stained at day 7. Post-testing, bone cylinders were formalin fixed and bony ingrowth was measured via microscopy.
Results
Viability of the freshly harvested ex vivo bone cylinders was maintained for up to 28 days. Two samples remain unanalysed due to COVID lockdown, one in each group. Similar to osteointegration seen in live animal models, evidence of bony ingrowth was seen more markedly at the bone-implant interface under dynamic conditions. This was evident by a greater intensity of calcein staining, confirming the deposition of new bone, at the bone-implant interface. In comparison, under static conditions, calcein staining was observed randomly all over the cylinder.
Conclusion
This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that implant bony adaptation and ingrowth can be measured in vitro under known cyclic micromotion/loading conditions. This comparatively low cost, low ethical impact, controlled loading laboratory method has potential to accelerate the rate of implant development whilst conforming with the principles of NC3Rs.
Declaration of Interest
(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
