Objectives. We sought to determine if a durable bilayer implant composed of trabecular metal with autologous periosteum on top would be suitable to reconstitute large osteochondral defects. This design would allow for secure implant fixation, subsequent integration and remodeling. Materials and Methods. Adult sheep were randomly assigned to one of three groups (n = 8/group): 1. trabecular metal/periosteal graft (TMPG), 2. trabecular metal (TM), 3. empty defect (ED). Cartilage and bone healing were assessed macroscopically, biochemically (type II collagen, sulfated glycosaminoglycan (sGAG) and double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) content) and histologically. Results. At 16 weeks post-operatively, histological scores amongst treatment groups were not statistically different (TMPG: overall 12.7, cartilage 8.6, bone 4.1; TM: overall 14.2, cartilage 9.5, bone 4.9; ED: overall 13.6, cartilage 9.1, bone 4.5). Metal scaffolds were incorporated into the surrounding bone, both in TM and TMPG. The sGAG yield was lower in the neo-cartilage regions compared with the articular cartilage (AC) controls (TMPG 20.8/AC 39.5, TM 25.6/AC 33.3, ED 32.2/AC 40.2 µg sGAG/1 mg respectively), with statistical significance being achieved for the TMPG group (p < 0.05). Hypercellularity of the neo-cartilage was found in TM and ED, as the dsDNA content was significantly higher (p < 0.05) compared with contralateral AC controls (TM 126.7/AC 71.1, ED 99.3/AC 62.8 ng dsDNA/1 mg). The highest type II collagen content was found in neo-cartilage after TM compared with TMPG and ED (TM 60%/TMPG 40%/ED 39%). Inter-treatment differences were not significant. Conclusions. TM is a highly suitable material for the reconstitution of osseous defects. TM enables excellent bony ingrowth and fast integration. However, combined with autologous periosteum, such a biocomposite failed to promote satisfactory neo-cartilage formation. Cite this article: E. H. Mrosek, H-W. Chung, J. S. Fitzsimmons, S. W. O’Driscoll, G. G. Reinholz, J. C. Schagemann. Porous tantalum biocomposites for osteochondral defect repair: A follow-up study in a sheep model. Bone Joint J 2016;5:403–411. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.59.BJR-2016-0070.R1