Skip to main content
Log in

The influence of mechanical loading on osseointegration: an animal study

  • Article
  • Published:
Science in China Series C: Life Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Osseointegration of implant provides a stable support for the prosthesis under functional loads. The timing of loading is a critical parameter that can govern the success of the osseointegration of implant. However, it is not clear whether the early loading can affect the success of osseointegration, or whether the no-loading healing period can be shortened. This paper presents an animal study conducted to investigate how external loads influence the osseointegration at the initial stage of healing. Titanium implants were inserted into the goat tibia laterally, and different axial loadings were applied to the implants in 4 weeks after surgery. After the 2 weeks period of early loading, animals were sacrificed and the tibia bones with the implants were cut off from the bodies. Then mechanical test was employed to find out the differences in the pull-out force, and shear strength at the bone-implant interface between the non-loaded and the loaded implants. The implant-bone interfaces were analyzed by histomorphometric method, SEM (scanning electron micrograph) and EDS (energy density spectrum). The results indicated that the bone-implant interface did not well integrate 4 weeks after surgery, and the fibrous tissue could be found at the interfaces of the specimens without loadings. While the results of loaded specimens with 10 N axial force showed that that parts of the interface were well integrated, indicating that the early mild loading may play a positive role in the process of the osseointegration. The results support that a certain range of external loading would influence the process of osseointegration, and appropriate mechanical loading can be applied to shorten the osseointegration period after surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brånemark R, Brånemark P-I, Rydevik B L, et al. Osseointegration in skeletal reconstruction and rehabilitation: A review. J Rehabil Res Dev, 2001, 38: 175–181, 11392650

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brånemark P-I. Osseointegration: biotechnological perspective and clinical modality. In: Brånemark P-I, Rydevik B L, Skalak R, eds. Osseointegration in Skeletal Reconstruction and Joint Replacement. Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publish Co, 1997. 167–174

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lundborg G, Brånemark P-I, Rosen B. Osseointegrated thumb prostheses: a concept for fixation of digit prosthetic devices. J Hand Surg. 1996, 221: 216–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lundborg G. Osseointegrated metacarpophalangeal joint prostheses in the hand. In: Brånemark P-I, Rydevik B L, Skalak R, eds. Osseointegration in Skeletal Reconstruction and Joint Replacement. Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publish Co, 1997, 167–174

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rydevik B L. Amputation prostheses and osseoperception in the lower and upper extremity. In: Brånemark P-I, Rydevik B L, Skalak R, eds. Osseointegration in Skeletal Reconstruction and Joint Replacement. Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publish Co, 1997. 175–182

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bergkvis R. Osseointegration: case report on prosthetic treatment in transfemoral amputation. Conference Book: IXth World Congress of the ISPO, June 28–July 3, 1998. Amsterdam. The Netherlands. 1998, 136–137

  7. Gunterberg B, Brånemark P-I, Brånemark R, et al. Osseointegrated prosthesis in lower limb amputation: the development of a new concept. Conference Book: IXth World Congress of the ISPO, June 28–July 3, 1998. Amsterdam. The Netherlands. 1998, 137–139

  8. Albrektson T, Johansson C. Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration. Eur Spine J, 2001, 10: 96–101, 10.1007/s005860100282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Skalak R. Biomechanics of osseointegration. In: Brånemark P-I., Rydevik B L, Skalak R, eds. Osseointegration in Skeletal Reconstruction and Joint Replacement. Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publish Co, 1997. 45–56

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brånemark P-I, Hansson B O, Adell R, et al. Osseointegrated titanium implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg, 1977, 11(Suppl.16):1–175

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brånemark P-I. Osseointegration and its experimental studies. J Prosthet Dent, 1983, 50: 399–410, 6352924, 10.1016/S0022-3913(83)80101-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Szmukler-Moncler S, Salama H, Reingewirtz Y, et al. Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone-dental implant interface: review of experimental literature. J Biomed Mater Res, 1998, 43:192–203, 9619438, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199822)43:2<192::AID-JBM14>3.0.CO;2-K, 1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXjsFeqsrY%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Puleo D A, Nanci A. Understanding and controlling the bone-implant interface. Biomaterials, 1999, 20:2311–2321, 10614937, 10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00160-X, 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXlsVWm

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Brånemark R, Öhrnell L-O, Nilsson P, et al. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials, 1997, 18: 969–978, 9212192, 10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00018-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Brånemark R, Öhrnell L-O, Slalak R, et al. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration: an experimental in vivo investigation in the beagle dog. J Orthop Res, 1998, 16: 61–69, 9565075, 10.1002/jor.1100160111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Brånemark R, Skalak R. An in-vivo method for biomechanical characterization of bone anchored implants. Med Eng Phys, 1998, 20:216–219, 9690492, 10.1016/S1350-4533(98)00023-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chang C K, Wu J S, Mao D L, et al. Mechanical and histological evaluation of hydroxyapatite coated and no coated Ti6Al4V implants in tibia bone. J Biomed Mater Res, 2001, 56: 17–23., 11309786, 10.1002/1097-4636(200107)56:1<17::AID-JBM1063>3.0.CO;2-T, 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXjs1Wmt7g%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Darimint G L, Cloots R, Heinen E, et al. In vivo behavior of hydroxyapatite coatings on titanium implants: a quantitative study in rabbit. Biomaterials, 2002, 23: 2569–2575., 10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00392-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mano T, Ueyama Y, Ishikawa K, et al. Initial tissue response to a titanium implant coated with appetite at room temperature using a blast coating method. Biomaterials, 2002, 23: 1931–1936, 11996033, 10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00319-2, 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XitlaktrY%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hansson S, Norton M. The relation between surface roughness and interfacial shear strength for bone-anchored implants: a mathematical model. J Biomech, 1999, 32: 829–836, 10433425, 10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00058-5, 1:STN:280:DyaK1MzmtVyjtQ%3D%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to YuBo Fan.

Additional information

Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 30370376, 10529202 and 10672015).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fan, Y., Xiu, K., Dong, X. et al. The influence of mechanical loading on osseointegration: an animal study. SCI CHINA SER C 52, 579–586 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11427-009-0070-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11427-009-0070-z

Keywords

Navigation