Periarticular Reaction to Wear Debris of Different Ceramic Materials
For the last 30 years Alumina and Zirconia ceramics constituted the ceramic materials used for the manufacturing of Total Joint Arthroplasty, thanks to the high biological and mechanical properties of these materials (Piconi and al, 2003; Piconi and Maccauro 1999). The new ceramic biocomposite ZPTA (Alumina Matrix Composites by Transformation Toughened and in situ Plateled Reinforcement) that is currently known as Biolox® delta, produced by CeramTec (namely ZPTA in the paper), improving the mechanical properties when compared to Alumina (Burger W. and Richter H.G. 2000), allowed to manufacture components which were not previously possible, and especially the small- diameter ball heads (<28 mm), thin-walled cup insert, knee and finger joints. Few paper reported the in vitro and in vivo biocompatibility tests on this new material (Willmann, et al. 2000), and in particular as ceramic joints are intended for use in younger patient (Black 1997, Schmalzried 2001), hence the ones with longer life expectations, the study of the chronic effects of small particles, in term of local and systemic toxicity, including carcinogenesys becomes more and more relevant (Archimbeck et al. 2000).
KeywordsWear Debris Ceramic Particle Total Joint Arthroplasty Peripheral Organ Crevice Corrosion
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Black J (1997) Prospects for alternate Bearing surfaces in total hip replacement arthroplasty of the hip. In: Puhl W (ed) Performance of the wear couple BIOLOX Forte in hip arthroplasty, Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 2–10Google Scholar
- 3.Burger W, Richter HG (2000) High Strength and Toughness Alumina Matrix Composites by Transformation Toughened and in situ Plateled Reinforcement (ZPTA) — The New Generation of Bioceramics. Bioceramics 13: 545–548.Google Scholar
- 5.Fisher J, Stone MH, Tipper JL, Ingham E. (2001) Wear debris generation with metal-on-polyethilene, Metal-on Metal, Ceramic-on-Ceramic hip prostheses. In: Rieker C, Oberholzer S, Wyss U (eds) World Tribology Forum in Arthroplasty. Hans Huber, Bern, pp 25–30Google Scholar
- 7.Maccauro G, Piconi C, Muratori F, De Santis V, Burger W (2002) Tissue reactions to ceramic wear debris: clinical cases vs animal model (Proc. 8th BIOLOX Symp. Bioceramics in joint Arthroplasty, Zippel H and Dietrich M Eds) 81–87Google Scholar
- 8.Piconi C, Maccauro G., Muratori F., Brach del Prever E. (2003) Alumina and zirconia ceramics in joint replacements J. Applied Biomaterials & Biomechanics 1:19–32.Google Scholar
- 10.Rae T (1986) The macrophage to implant materials with special reference to those used in Orthopaedics. CRC Crit Rev Biocomp 2: 97Google Scholar
- 11.Schmalzried TP, Callaghan JJ (1999) Current Concepts Review: Wear in total hip and knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg 81-A:115–136Google Scholar
- 12.Schmalzried TP (2001) Patient activity and wear. In: Rieker C, Oberholzer S, Wyss U (eds) World Tribology Forum in Arthroplasty. Hans Huber, Bern, 31–34Google Scholar
- 13.Sedel L (2001) Tribology of hip joint replacement. In: Surgical techniques in Orthopedics and Traumatology, Edition Scientifiques et Médicales Elsevier SAS, Paris, 55–430–E–l0Google Scholar
- 14.Urban RM, Jacobs JJ, Tomlinson MJ, et al (2000) Dissemination of wear particles to the liver, spleen, and abdominal lymph nodes of patients with hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 82-A: 457–477Google Scholar
- 15.Willert MG, Broback LG, Buchan GM, et al (1996) Crevice corrosion of cemented titanium alloy stems in total hip replacement. Clin Ortop 333:51–75Google Scholar
- 16.Willmann G, von Charnier W, Pfaff HG, Rock R (2000) Biocompatibility of a New Alumina Matrix Biocomposite AMG Bioceramics 13:569–572Google Scholar