Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 48(16): 1174-1180, 2023 Aug 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37235799

RESUMEN

STUDY DESIGN: A laboratory study comparing polyether ether ketone (PEEK)-zeolite and PEEK spinal implants in an ovine model. OBJECTIVE: This study challenges a conventional spinal implant material, PEEK, to PEEK-zeolite using a nonplated cervical ovine model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although widely used for spinal implants due to its material properties, PEEK is hydrophobic, resulting in poor osseointegration, and elicits a mild nonspecific foreign body response. Zeolites are negatively charged aluminosilicate materials that are hypothesized to reduce this pro-inflammatory response when used as a compounding material with PEEK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen skeletally mature sheep were, each, implanted with one PEEK-zeolite interbody device and one PEEK interbody device. Both devices were packed with autograft and allograft material and randomly assigned to one of 2 cervical disc levels. The study involved 2 survival time points (12 and 26 weeks) and biomechanical, radiographic, and immunologic endpoints. One sheep expired from complications not related to the device or procedure. A biomechanical evaluation was based on measures of segmental flexibility, using 6 degrees of freedom pneumatic spine tester. Radiographic evaluation was performed using microcomputed tomography scans in a blinded manner by 3 physicians. Levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines, interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha at the implant, were quantified using immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: PEEK-zeolite and PEEK exhibited an equivalent range of motion in flexion extension, lateral bending, and axial torsion. A motion was significantly reduced for implanted devices at both time points as compared with native segments. Radiographic assessments of fusion and bone formation were similar for both devices. PEEK-zeolite exhibited lower levels of IL-1ß ( P = 0.0003) and IL-6 ( P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: PEEK-zeolite interbody fusion devices provide initial fixation substantially equivalent to PEEK implants but exhibit a reduced pro-inflammatory response. PEEK-zeolite devices may reduce the chronic inflammation and fibrosis previously observed with PEEK devices.


Asunto(s)
Fusión Vertebral , Zeolitas , Animales , Ovinos , Microtomografía por Rayos X/métodos , Interleucina-6 , Polietilenglicoles/química , Cetonas/química , Éteres , Fusión Vertebral/métodos , Fenómenos Biomecánicos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA