Advertisement

The Hardystonite/PA66 Composite for Using as the Intervertebral Fusion Cage

  • Fariborz TavangarianEmail author
  • Sorour Sadeghzade
  • Rahmatollah Emadi
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to design and evaluate nano-hardystonite/polyamide 66 composites with close mechanical properties to the trabecular bone to prevent the stress shielding phenomenon for bone tissue engineering applications. This composite can be used as an intervertebral fusion cage to perform spinal fusion between vertebrae in the lumbar spine. The pure nano-hardystonite powder was fabricated by combustion method at 900 °C following by 5 h ball mill. The nano-hardystonite/Polyamide 66 and nano-hydroxyapatite/Polyamide 66 cage were prepared by injection molding method to compare the mechanical and biological properties. In this end, the X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were utilized to characterize the prepared powder and cage samples. Based on the results, the addition of 30% nano-hardystonite improved both mechanical and bioactivity properties. The optimum hardystonite/PA66 samples revealed the compressive strength and elastic modulus of 69.19 ± 0.89 MPa and 2.56 ± 0.5 GPa, respectively, compared to 53.45 ± 1.2 MPa and 3.45 ± 0.3 GPa in hydroxyapatite/PA66 sample, respectively. In addition, observation of the superior apatite formation ability of hardystonite/PA66 compared to hydroxyapatite/PA66 indicated that it can be used as a spinal vertebrae replacement material.

Keywords

Cage Polyamide Hydroxyapatite Hardystonite Spinal vertebrae 

References

  1. 1.
    Yang X, Song Y, Liu L, Liu H, Zeng J, Pei F (2012) Anterior reconstruction with nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide.e-66Cage After Thoracic and Lumbar Corpectomy. Orthopeedics 35:66–73Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roohani-Esfahani SI, Chen Y, Shi J, Zreiqat H (2013) Fabrication and characterization of a new, strong and bioactive ceramic scaffold for bone regeneration. Mater Lett 107:378–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhao Z, Jiang D, Ou Y, Tang K, Luo X, Quan Z (2012) A hollow cylindrical nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide composite strut for cervical reconstruction after cervical corpectomy. J Clin Neurosci 19:536–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xiong Y, Ren C, Zhang B, Yang H, Lang Y, Min L, Zhang W, Pei F, Yan Y, Li H, Mo A, Tu C, Duan H (2014) Analyzing the behavior of a porous nano-hydroxyapatite/poly. Amide 66 (n-HA/PA66) composite for healing of bone defects. Int J Nanomedicine 9:485–494Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roohani-Esfahani SI, Dunstan CR, Davies B, Pearce S, Williams R, Zreiqat H (2012) Repairing a critical-sized bone defect with highly porous modified and unmodified baghdadite scaffolds. Acta Biomater 8:4162–4172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hutmacher DW, Schantz JT, CX L, KC T, TC L (2007) State of the art and future directions of scaffold-based bone engineering from a biomaterials perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1:60–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ht H, Me M, Rt H (2003) Complications of multilevel cervical corpectomies and reconstruction with titanium cages and anterior plating. J Spinal Disord 16:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thalgott JS, Xiongsheng C, Giuffre JM (2003) Single stage anterior cervical reconstruction with titanium mesh cages, local bone graft, and anterior plating. Spine J 3:294–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhanga X, Zhanga Y, Zhangb X, Wanga Y, Wanga J, Lua M, Li H (2015) Mechanical properties and cytocompatibility of carbon fibre reinforced nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide66 ternary biocomposite. J Mech Behave Biomed Mater 42:267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xu Q, Lu H, Zhang J, Lu G, Deng Z, Mo A (2010) Tissue engineering scaffold material of porous nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide 66. Int J Nanomedicine 5:331–335Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sadeghzade S, Emadi R, Labbaf S (2016) Formation mechanism of nano-hardystonite powder prepared by mechanochemical synthesis. Adv Powder Technol 27:2238–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sadeghzade S, Emadi R, Tavangarian F, Naderi M (2017) Fabrication and evaluation of silica-based ceramic scaffolds for hard tissue engineering applications. Mater Sci Eng C 71:431–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramaswamy Y, Wu C, Zhou H, Zreiqat H (2008) Biological response of human bone cells to zinc-modified Ca–Si-based ceramics. Acta Biomater 4:1487–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seiler JG, Johnson J (2000) Iliac crest autogenous bone grafting: donor site complications. J South Orthop Assoc 9:91–97Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sadeghzade S, Shamoradi F, Emadi R, Tavangarian F (2017) Fabrication and characterization of baghdadite nanostructured scaffolds by space holder method. J Mech Behave Biomed Mater 68:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fariborz Tavangarian
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sorour Sadeghzade
    • 1
    • 2
  • Rahmatollah Emadi
    • 2
  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering Program, School of Science, Engineering and TechnologyPennsylvania State UniversityHarrisburg, MiddletownUSA
  2. 2.Materials Research Group, Department of Materials EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations