Piezoelectric ceramic implants: <i>in vivo</i> results

Park, J. B.; Kelly, Brian; Kenner, G.H.; Recum, Andreas F. von; Grether, M. F.; Coffeen, William W.

doi:10.1002/jbm.820150114

Cited by 101 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In agreement with earlier work, increased ossification was found on piezoelectric films made from PLLA in a rabbit model. 50 A further study showing an improved biological response to piezoelectric materials was carried out by Feng et al 12 As with the earlier studies, 44,45 BaTiO 3 -containing ceramics were implanted in canine subjects. In this case, the piezoelectric material was in the form of a hydroxyapatite-barium titanate (HABT) composite.…”

Section: In Vivo Studiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electrically Active Bioceramics: A Review of Interfacial Responses

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical potentials in mechanically loaded bone have been implicated as signals in the bone remodeling cycle. Recently, interest has grown in exploiting this phenomenon to develop electrically active ceramics for implantation in hard tissue which may induce improved biological responses. Both polarized hydroxyapatite (HA), whose surface charge is not dependent on loading, and piezoelectric ceramics, which produce electrical potentials under stress, have been studied in order to determine the possible benefits of using electrically active bioceramics as implant materials. The polarization of HA has a positive influence on interfacial responses to the ceramic. In vivo studies of polarized HA have shown polarized samples to induce improvements in bone ingrowth. The majority of piezoelectric ceramics proposed for implant use contain barium titanate (BaTiO(3)). In vivo and in vitro investigations have indicated that such ceramics are biocompatible and, under appropriate mechanical loading, induce improved bone formation around implants. The mechanism by which electrical activity influences biological responses is yet to be clearly defined, but is likely to result from preferential adsorption of proteins and ions onto the polarized surface. Further investigation is warranted into the use of electrically active ceramics as the indications are that they have benefits over existing implant materials.

show abstract

Section: In Vivo Studiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…44 The implantation method was the same as that used in the previous experiment. Subjective assessment of bone ingrowth at the bone-implant interface showed no differences between poled and unpoled samples.…”

Section: In Vivo Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrically Active Bioceramics: A Review of Interfacial Responses

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other tests (8,18) showed that externally generated direct currents could increase the strength of fixation of intramedullary plugs of porous metals, but Park et al (14), failed to show that growth of bone was affected by polarization induced by physiologic loading. Similar negative results were reported by Schumacher et al (19) …”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Piezoelectric internal fixation devices: A new approach to electrical augmentation of osteogenesis

Cochran

Johnson

Kadaba

et al. 1985

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prototype testing has been accomplished on a piezoelectric, internal fixation plate. This device combines a piezoelectric material with an internal fixation device as an integrated structure that provides mechanical stability, together with self-generated electrical stimulation, for treating fractures and nonunion. In bench and animal tests we have demonstrated that cyclical loading can cause a device of this type to generate electrical charge while attached to bone. After rectification, direct currents within the range known to stimulate osteogenesis can be produced by weight-bearing loads. Furthermore, electrical output of the implants can be increased by externally applied ultrasonic energy. These twin developments add significantly to the potential armamentarium of devices to enhance bone healing.

show abstract

“…There is evidence that stress-generated potentials produced by piezoelectric ceramics can stimulate bone regeneration in situ. For example, barium titanate implants promoted osteogenesis in dog femurs (Park et al, 1981). Lithium sodium potassium niobate, a new generation of lead-free piezoelectric ceramics, has expanded its scope of reperaing bone defects owing to its better and more stable piezoelectricity compared with barium titanate (Saito et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%