Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:15:16.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bioactivity Responses of Different Uhmwpe Particles from In-Vivo and In-Vitro Tests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

YoungSoo Park ,
ShangYou Yang ,
Paul H. Wooley ,
Katharine Merritt ,
Stephen Hsu  and
Michael J. McNallan
YoungSoo Park
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899 University of Illinois at Chicago, 842 W. Taylor Street (M/C 246) Chicago, Illinois 60607
ShangYou Yang
Affiliation:
Wayne State University, One South Hutzel Hospital, Detroit, MI 48201
Paul H. Wooley
Affiliation:
Wayne State University, One South Hutzel Hospital, Detroit, MI 48201
Katharine Merritt
Affiliation:
U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville MD 20857
Stephen Hsu
Affiliation:
National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Michael J. McNallan
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Chicago, 842 W. Taylor Street (M/C 246) Chicago, Illinois 60607
Get access

Abstract

This paper describes the results of bioactivity responses to different ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) particles. Particles were produced by a wear tester using two different textures of steel counters, one with cross-hatched and the other with uni-hatched grooves. These two textured surfaces produced two distinct populations of wear particles. One is larger and more elongated (fibril shapes) than the other. The mean sizes and aspect ratios of the particles are in the ranges of 5 μm to 25 μm and about 1.5 to 3, respectively. These two distinct UHMWPE particles were examined through in-vitro and in-vivo tests. Macrophages RAW 264.7 and the murine air-pouch model of inflammation were employed to characterize the effect of the particle size and shape. Preliminary in-vivo tests results showed that more elongated and larger particles enhanced bio-reactions.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 662: Symposia LL/MM/NN/OO – Biomaterials for Drug Delivery & Tissue Engineering , 2000 , LL3.8
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Willert, H.G., and Puls, P., Arch. Orthop, Unfall-Chir 72, 33 (1972).Google Scholar
2. Howie, D.W., Manthey, B., Hay, S., and Vernon-Roberts, B., Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 292, 352 (1993).Google Scholar
3. Howie, D.W., Vernon-Roberts, B., Oakeshott, R., and Manthey, B., The journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 70–A (2); 257 (1988).Google Scholar
4. Shanbhag, A.S., Bailey, H.O., Hwang, D.S., Cha, C.W., Eror, N.G., and Rubash, H.E., Journal of Biomedical Materials Research 53 (1), 100 (2000).Google Scholar
5. Shanbhag, A.S., Jacobs, J.J., Glant, T.T., Gilbert, J.L., Black, J., Galante, J.O., J. Bone Joint Surg, 76 B, 60 (1994).Google Scholar
6. Horowitz, S.M., Doty, S.B., Lane, J. M., Burstein, A.H., J. Bone Joint Surg, 75–A, 802, (1993).Google Scholar
7. Goodman, S.B. and Chin, R.C., Clin Orthop, 257 305, (1990).Google Scholar
8. Kubo, Toshikazu, Sawada, Kohei, Hirakawa, Kazuno, Shimizu, Choji, Takamatsu, Tetsuro, and Hirasawa, Yasusuku, J. Biomedical Materials research 45 (4), 363 (1999).Google Scholar
9. Wooley, P.H., Song, Z., Mayton, L., Nasser, S., Cho, U., Shen, M.C., Hsu, S.M., submitted to the Biomaterials Society, 2000.Google Scholar
10. Merritt, K., Hitchins, V.M, and Neale, A.R., 6th World Biomaterials Congress Transactions vol III, 1191 (2000).Google Scholar