Advertisement

Porous tantalum in spinal surgery: an overview

  • Marko Hanc
  • Samo Karel Fokter
  • Matjaž Vogrin
  • Andrej Molicnik
  • Gregor RecnikEmail author
General Review • FUSION - DEVICE

Abstract

Porous tantalum is an open-cell metal structure that approximates the appearance of human cancellous bone. It has a low modulus of elasticity, close to that of subchondral and cancellous bones, leading to better load transfer and minimizing the stress-shielding phenomenon. Its coefficient of friction is one of the highest among biomaterials, allowing for sufficient primary stabilization of implants, possibly even without screw fixation. Different fusion rates have been achieved in anterior cervical fusion, which lead to contradictory views among spine surgeons. However, in the lumbar spine, trabecular metal has been demonstrated to be effective in obtaining fusion and improving patient outcomes after anterior as well as posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Keywords

Trabecular metal Interbody device Fusion rate Cervical Lumbar Interbody fusion 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Bobyn JD, Stackpool GJ, Hacking SA, Tanzer M, Krygier JJ (1999) Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 81B:907–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paganias CG, Tsakotos GA, Koutsostathis SD, Macheras GA (2012) Osseous integration in porous tantalum implants. Indian J Orthop 46(5):505–513PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Levine BR, Sporer S, Poggie RA, Della Valle CJ, Jacobs JJ (2006) Experimental and clinical performance of porous tantalum in orthopedic surgery. Biomaterials 27:4671–4681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karageorgious V, Kaplan D (2005) Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. Biomaterials 26:5474–5491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sagomonyants KB, Hakim-Zargar M, Jhaveri A, Aronow MS, Gronowicz G (2011) Porous tantalum stimulates the proliferation and osteogenesis of osteoblasts from elderly female patients. J Orthop Res 28:609–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanzlik JA, Day JS (2013) Bone ingrowth in well-fixed retrieved porous tantalum implants. J Arthroplasty 28:922–927PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zou X, Li H, Bünger M, Egund N, Lind M, Bünger C (2004) Bone ingrowth characteristics of porous tantalum and carbon fiber interbody devices: an experimental study in pigs. Spine J 4:99–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D’Angelo F, Murena L, Campagnolo M, Zatti G, Cherubino P (2008) Analysis of bone ingrowth on a tantalum cup. Indian J Orthop 42(3):275–278PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wigfield C, Robertson J, Gill S, Nelson R (2003) Clinical experience with porous tantalum cervical interbody implants in a prospective randomized controlled trial. Br J Neurosurg 17(5):418–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kasliwal MK, Baskin DS, Traynelis VC (2013) Failure of porous tantalum cervical interbody fusion devices. J Spinal Disord Tech 26:239–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baskin DS, Traynelis V (2004) Failure of porous tantalum cervical interbody fusion devices: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, multi-center, clinical study. Cervical Spine Research Society, Boston, Annual Meeting. Spine Journal Meeting Abstracts. Paper# 5:38–40Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schoettle T, Standard S, Lanford G, Abram S, Robertson D, Robie B (2005) Successful use of a modern porous tantalum (trabecular metal) device for cervical interbody fusion: results from a prospective, randomized multicenter clinical study. Cervical Spine Research Society, San Diego, Annual Meeting. Spine Journal Meeting Abstracts. Poster# 11:178–179Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vicario C, Lopez-Oliva F, Sánchez-Lorente T, Zimmermann M, Asenjo-Siguero JJ, Ibarzábal FLA (2006) Artrodesis cervical anterior mediante implante de tantalio. Resultados clínicos y radiológicos. Neurocirugía 17:123–139Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fernandez-Fairen M, Sala P, Dufoo M, Ballester J, Murcia A, Merzthal L (2008) Anterior cervical fusion with tantalum implant. Spine 33(5):465–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barnes M, Ton L (2009) Trabecular metal blocks for ACDF: porous fusion or poor fusion? J Bone Joint Surg Br 91-B(III):430–431Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Löfgren H, Engquist M, Hoffmann P, Sigstedt B, Vavruch L (2010) Clinical and radiological evaluation of trabecular metal and the Smith-Robinson technique in anterior cervical fusion for degenerative disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled study with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 19(3):464–473PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matejka J, Zeman J, Belatka J (2009) Mid-term results of 360-degree Lumbar Spondylodesis with the use of a tantalum implant for disc replacement. Acta Chirurgiae Orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Čechosl 76:388–393Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Molloy S, Butler J, Yu H, Sewell M, Benton A, Selvadurai S, Agu O (2014) Clinical and radiologic outcome from 360-degree lumbar spondylodesis using porous tantalum cages in complex spinal reconstruction for degenerative lumbar spine deformity. Bone Joint J 96-B:15–26Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Malloy JP, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Harris R, Slotkin E, Gillette J (2010) Clinical outcomes with porous tantalum in lumbar interbody fusion. Proceedings of the NASS 25th Annual Meeting. Spine J 10:147–148Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hoy K, Bünger C, Niederman B, Helming P, Hansen ES, Li H, Andersen T (2013) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterolateral instrumented fusion (PLF) in degenerative lumbar disorders: a randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 22(9):2022–2029PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lequin MB, Verbaan D, Bouma GJ (2014) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with stand-alone trabecular metal cages for repeatedly recurrent lumbar disc herniation and back pain. J Neurosurg Spine 20(6):617–622PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marko Hanc
    • 1
  • Samo Karel Fokter
    • 1
  • Matjaž Vogrin
    • 1
  • Andrej Molicnik
    • 1
  • Gregor Recnik
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryUniversity Clinical Centre MariborMariborSlovenia

Personalised recommendations