Abstract
Calcium phosphate ceramics with specific physicochemical properties have been shown to induce de novo bone formation upon ectopic implantation in a number of animal models. In this study we explored the influence of physicochemical properties as well as the animal species on material-induced ectopic bone formation. Three bioceramics were used for the study: phase-pure hydroxyapatite (HA) sintered at 1200°C and two biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) ceramics, consisting of 60 wt.% HA and 40 wt.% TCP (β-Tricalcium phosphate), sintered at either 1100°C or 1200°C. 108 samples of each ceramic were intramuscularly implanted in dogs, rabbits, and rats for 6, 12, and 24 weeks respectively. Histological and histomorphometrical analyses illustrated that ectopic bone and/or osteoid tissue formation was most pronounced in BCP sintered at 1100°C and most limited in HA, independent of the animal model. Concerning the effect of animal species, ectopic bone formation reproducibly occurred in dogs, while in rabbits and rats, new tissue formation was mainly limited to osteoid. The results of this study confirmed that the incidence and the extent of material-induced bone formation are related to both the physicochemical properties of calcium phosphate ceramics and the animal model.
Highlights
Bone defects caused by tumor resection, trauma, infection and congenital anomalies remain an important challenge in the field of orthopaedic and craniofacial surgery
BCP1200 demonstrated biphasic nature of the ceramics and no apparent differences were found as a result of difference in sintering temperature
At the temperature of 1100uC the surface of the biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) ceramics was rougher with more micropores between the ceramic grains as compared to the ceramic sintered at 1200uC (Fig. 2)
Summary
Bone defects caused by tumor resection, trauma, infection and congenital anomalies remain an important challenge in the field of orthopaedic and craniofacial surgery. Clinical treatment of such defects involves the use of natural grafts, like autograft and allograft, or synthetics [1,2]. The use of allograft, where availability is less of a problem, suffers from clinical risks of disease transmission and immunogenic reaction. Another major drawback of allograft is its inconsistent quality from both a biological and a mechanical perspective [1,3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
