Abstract

In order to improve osseointegration, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody fusion cages are frequently surface coated. The bonding strength of the coatings is mostly investigated under unrealistic loading conditions. To close this gap, in this study, uncoated and coated cages were loaded in a clinical setup in order to investigate their real resistance against abrasion. Six uncoated, six calcium phosphate (CaP) nanocoated, and six titanium (Ti) nanocoated PEEK cages were tested in this study. The experimental setup was designed to mimic cage impaction into the intervertebral disc space using polyurethane (PU) foam blocks as vertebral body substitutes. The cage surface was inspected before and after impaction, and their weight was measured. Impaction resulted in abrasion at the tip of the ridges on the implant surface. The mean weight loss was 0.39 mg for the uncoated cages, 0.57 mg for the CaP nanocoated cages, and 0.75 mg for the Ti nanocoated cages. These differences were statistically significant. In conclusion, differences between the three cage types were found concerning the amount of abrasion. However, all three cages lost less weight than a comparative Ti plasma spray coated cage, which showed a mean weight loss of 2.02 mg. This may be because the plasma spray coating is significantly thicker than the two nanocoatings. If compared with the permitted amount of weight loss derived from an FDA guidance document, which is approximately 1.7 mg, the wear of the Ti plasma spray coated cage is above this limit, whereas the wear for all other cage types is below.

Highlights

  • Numerous spinal interbody fusion cages are made of polyetheretherketone (PEEK)

  • The mean weight loss was between 0.39 mg for the uncoated PEEK posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) cage and 0.75 mg for the Ti nanocoated PEEK PLIF cage (Table 2)

  • The results showed that even the uncoated cage lost weight (0.39 mg in mean), followed by the calcium phosphate (CaP) (0.57 mg) and the Ti nanocoated cages (0.75 mg)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Numerous spinal interbody fusion cages are made of polyetheretherketone (PEEK). The advantages of this biomaterial are its good biocompatibility, its relatively low modulus of elasticity (3.5 MPa versus 100–110 MPa for titanium, Ti ),[1] which reduces the risk of bone resorption and stress shielding, and its radiolucency, which enables easier assessment of fusion on radiographs. One of the major disadvantages of PEEK is its poor osseointegration, especially in case of smooth implant surfaces. Fibrous tissue layers are often observed at the PEEK-bone interface.[2]. To counter this disadvantage, PEEK cages are frequently surface treated or coated. Various types of coatings have been developed such as the Ti plasma spray coating, which is among the most frequently used

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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