Bone ingrowth analysis and interface evaluation of hydroxyapatite coated versus uncoated titanium porous bone implants

  • A. Moroni
  • V. L. Caja
  • C. Sabato
  • E. L. Egger
  • F. Gottsauner-Wolf
  • E. Y. S. Chao

Fourteen titanium porous-coated implants with a cylindrical shape (length 22 mm and diameter 5±0.3 mm) were prepared. Bead size was 250–350 μm. Seven implants were plasma-sprayed with hydroxyapatite and the other seven remained uncoated. Implants, both hydroxyapatite-coated and uncoated, were randomly selected and press fitted longitudinally into the proximal femoral cancellous bone bilaterally in seven dogs. After 12 weeks the dogs were euthanized and push-out and histomorphometric backscattered electron microscopy studies were carried out. No statistical differences in the mechanical tests were observed. Comparing hydroxyapatite-coated versus uncoated implants, the histomorphometric results showed statistical significance in the percentage of bone (p=0.01); and in bone index, ratio between bone ingrowth and bone ongrowth (p=0.01). The size of the bone implant interface was smaller in the hydroxyapatite applied to spherical bead titanium porous coatings were demonstrated. These morphological and histomorphometric results support the concepts involved with the use of hydroxyapatite as a coating for uncemented porous prosthetic devices.


Hydroxyapatite Bone Ingrowth Porous Coating Prosthetic Device Bead Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    M. B. Coventry, in “Joint replacement arthroplasty” (Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1991) p. 491.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. A. Engh, Clin. Orthop. 176 (1983) 52.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. O. Galante and D. P. Rivero, in “Advanced concepts in total hip replacement” (W. H. Harris, Thorofare: Slack, 1985) p. 135.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. P. Collier, M. B. Mayor, J. C. Chae, V. A. Surprenant, H. P. Surprenant and L. A. Dauphinais, Clin. Orthop. 235 (1988) 173.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. D. Cook, K. A. Thomas and R. J. Haddad, Clin.Orthop. 234 (1988) 90.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Judet, M. Siguier, B. Brumpt and Th. Judet, Rev. Chir. Orthop. 64 (Suppl. 2) (1978) 14.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    G. A. Lord, J. R. Hardy and F. J. Kummer, Clin. Orthop. 141 (1979) 2.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Mittelmeier and G. Harms, Z. Orthop. 117 (1979) 478.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. M. Tracy and R. H. Doremus, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 18 (1984) 719.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. G. T. Geesink, Clin. Orthop. 261 (1990) 39.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. D. Cook, K. A. Thomas and J. F. Kay, Clin. Orthop. 265 (1991) 280.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. D. Cook, K. A. Thomas, J. F. Kay and M. J. Jarcho, Clin. Orthop. 230 (1988) 303.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. D. Cook, K. A. Thomas, J. F. Kay and M. J. Jarcho, Clin. Orthop. 232 (1988) 225.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. G. T. Geesink, K. de Groot and C. P. A. T. Klein, J. Bone Joint Surg. 70-B (1988) 17.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Oonishi, M. Yamamoto, H. Ishimaru, E. Tsuji, S. Kushitani, M. Aono and Y. Ukon, J. Bone Joint Surg. 71-B (1989) 213.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. R. Sumner, D. P. Rivero, A. K. Skipor and J. O. Galante, Trans. Soc. Biomater. 9 (1986) 69.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. P. Rivero, J. Fox, A. K. Skipor, R. M. Urban and J. O. Galante, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 22 (1988) 191.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. R. Carter and W. C. Hayes. J. Bone Joint Surg. 59-A (1977) 954.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. L. Stone, G. S. Beaupre and W. C. Hayes, J. Biomech. 16 (1983) 743.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. D. Bloebaum, K. N. Bachus and T. M. Boyce. J. Biomater. Appl. 5 (1990) 56.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. R. Sumner, J. M. Bryan, R. M. Urban and J. R. Kuszac, J. Orthop. Res. 8 (1990) 448.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    W. J. Whitehouse, J Microsc. 107 (1976) 183.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    R. E. Holmes, H. K. Hagler and C. A. Coletta, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 21 (1987) 731.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    K. A. Thomas, J. F. Kay, S. D. Cook and M. J. Jarcho, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 21 (1987) 1395.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Moroni
    • 1
  • V. L. Caja
    • 1
  • C. Sabato
    • 1
  • E. L. Egger
    • 2
  • F. Gottsauner-Wolf
    • 2
  • E. Y. S. Chao
    • 2
  1. 1.Third Department of Orthopaedic SurgreyRizzoli Orthopaedic InstituteBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Orthopaedic Biomechanics Lab., Department of OrthopaedicsMayo Clinic, Mayo FoundationRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations