Direct visualization and quantification of bone growth into porous titanium implants using micro computed tomography



The utility of porous metals for the integration of orthopaedic implants with host bone has been well established. Quantification of the tissue response to cementless implants is laborious and time consuming process requiring tissue processing, embedding, sectioning, polishing, imaging and image analysis. Micro-computed tomography (μCT) is a promising three dimensional (3D) imaging technique to quantify the tissue response to porous metals. However, the suitability and effectiveness of μCT for the quantification of bone ingrowth remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare bone growth within porous titanium implants using both μCT and traditional hard-tissue histology techniques. Cylindrical implants were implanted in the distal femora and proximal tibiae of a rabbit. After 6 weeks, bone ingrowth was quantified and compared by μCT, light microscopy and backscattered electron microscopy. Quantification of bone volume and implant porosity as determined by μCT compared well with data obtained by traditional histology techniques. Analysis of the 3D dataset showed that bone was present in the pores connected with openings larger 9.4 μm. For pore openings greater than 28.2 μm, the size of the interconnection had little impact on the bone density within the porosity for the titanium foams.


Average Pore Size Bone Ingrowth Flat Panel Detector Backscatter Scanning Electron Microscopy Porous Network Interconnectivity 
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.



The authors would like to thanks J.P.Nadeau for the preparation of the specimens and are also grateful for Dr. L Lim’s assistance with the animal surgery. The support of the team of Object Research System (ORS) inc. was also greatly appreciated.


  1. 1.
    Della Valle CJ, Mesko NW, Quigley L, Rosenberg AG, Jacobs JJ, Galante JO. Primary total hip arthroplasty with a porous-coated acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(5):1130–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levine BR, Sporera S, Poggie RA, Della Vallea CJ, Jacobs JJ. Experimental and clinical performance of porous tantalum in orthopedic surgery. Biomaterials. 2006;27(27):4671–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sporer S, Paprosky WG. The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6-suppl):83–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ryan G, Pandit A, Apatsidis DP. Fabrication methods of porous metals for use in orthopaedic applications. Biomaterials. 2006;27(13):2651–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lefebvre LP, Baril E, Bureau MN. Effect of the oxygen content in solution on the static and cyclic deformation of titanium foams. J Mater Sci: Mater Med. 2009;20(11):2223–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang Y, Ahn PB, Fitzpatrick DC, Heiner AD, Poggie RA, Brown TD. Interfacial frictional behavior: cancellous bone, cortical bone, and a novel porous tantalum biomaterial. J Musculoskeletal Res. 1999;3(4):245–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heiner AD, Brown TD. Frictional coefficients of a new bone ingrowth structure. Trans Orthopaed Res Soc. 2007;32:1623.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boyde A, Jones SJ. Back-scattered electron imaging of skeletal tissues. Metab Bone Dis Relat Res 1983–1984;5(3):145–50.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Assad M, Jarzem P, Leroux MA, Couillard C, Chernyshov AV, Charrette S, Rivard CH. Porous titanium-nickel for intervertebral fusion in a sheep model: part 1. Histomorphometric and radiological analyses. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2003;64B(2):107–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Odgaard A, Gundersen HJG. Quantification of connectivity in cancellous bone, with special emphasis on 3-D reconstruction. Bone. 1993;14(2):173–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feldkamp LA, Goldstein SA, Parfitt M, Jesion G, Kleerekoper M. The direct examination of three-dimensional bone architecture in vitro by computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. 1989;4(1):3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bouxsein ML, Boyd SK, Christiansen BA, Guldberg RE, Jepsen KJ, Müller R. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. 2010;25(7):1468–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gebauer M, Barvencik F, Mumme M, Beil FT, Vettorazzi E, Rueger JM, et al. Microarchitecture of the radial head and its changes in aging. Calcif Tissue Int. 2010;86(1):14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang ZM, Li ZC, Jiang LS, Jiang SD, Dai LY. Micro-CT and mechanical evaluation of subchondral trabecular bone structure between postmenopausal women with osteoarthritis and osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2009;21(8):1383–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bonse U, Busch F, Günnewig O, Beckmann F, Pahl R, Delling G, et al. 3D computed X-ray tomography of human cancellous bone at 8 microns spatial and 10(-4) energy resolution. Bone Miner. 1994;25(1):25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kirby BJ, Davis JR, Grant JA, Morgan MJ. Monochromatic microtomographic imaging of osteoporotic bone. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42(7):1375–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bernhardt R, Scharnweber D, Müller B, Thurner P, Schliephake H, Wyss P, et al. Comparison of microfocus and synchrotron X-ray tomography for the analysis of osseontegration around Ti6Al4 V-implants. Euro Cell Mater. 2004;7:42–51.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bobyn JD, Pilliar RM, Cameron HU, Weatherly GC. The optimum pore size, for the fixation of porous-surfaced metal implants by the ingrowth of bone. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;150:263–70.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baril E, Lefebvre LP, Piché N. X-ray microtomographic visualization and quantification of metallic foam structure filled with second phases—examples in biomedical applications. The proceeding of the 6th Int. Conf on Porous Metals and Metallic Foams (Metfoam 2009); 2009 Sep 1–4; Bratislava, Slovakia.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Otsuki B, Takemoto M, Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Kokubob T, Nakamura T. Pore throat size and connectivity determine bone and tissue ingrowth into porous implants: three-dimensional micro-CT based structural analyses of porous bioactive titanium implants. Biomaterials. 2006;27(35):5892–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jones AC, Arns CH, Sheppard AP, Hutmacher DW, Milthorpe K, Knacksted MA. Assessment of bone ingrowth into porous biomaterials using MICRO-CT. Biomaterials. 2007;28(15):2491–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lefebvre LP, Thomas Y. Method of making open cell material. US Patent No. 6,660,224 B2, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wazen R, Lefebvre LP, Baril E, Nanci A. Initial evaluation of bone ingrowth into a novel porous titanium coating. J Biomed Mat Res-Part B. 2010;94(1):64–71.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gauthier M, Menini R, Bureau MN, So SKV, Dion MJ, Lefebvre LP. Properties of novel titanium foams intended for biomedical applications. ASM Materials and Processes for Medical Devices Conference, 2003 Sep 8–10; Anaheim, California: 382–387.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hacking SA, Bobyn JD, Tanzer M, Krygier JJ. The osseous response to corundum blasted implant surfaces in a canine hip model. Clin Orthop. 1999;364:240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hacking SA, Harvey EJ, Tanzer M, Bobyn JD, Krygier JJ. Acid etched microtexture for enhancement of bone growth into porous coated implants. J Bone Joint Surg. 2003;85(8):1182–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Habibovic P, de Groot K. Osteoinductive biomaterials—properties and relevance in bone repair. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1(1):25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hsieh J. Computed tomography: principles, design, artifacts, and recent advances. 2nd ed. Bellingham, New York: SPIE Press and Wiley; 2009.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sethian JA. Level set methods and fast marching methods : evolving interfaces in computational geometry, fluid mechanics, computer vision, and materials science. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Council Canada—Industrial Materials InstituteBouchervilleCanada
  2. 2.Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital - Department of OrthopedicsBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations