Abstract
Focal knee resurfacing implants (FKRIs) are typically intended to treat focal cartilage defects in middle-aged patients. All currently available FKRIs are (partly) composed of metal, which potentially leads to degeneration of the opposing articulating cartilage and hampers follow-up using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to investigate the in vivo osseointegration process of a novel non-degradable thermoplastic polycarbonate-urethane (TPU) osteochondral implant. Bi-layered implants measuring 6 mm in diameter, with a double-curvature to match the approximate curvature of the goat medial femoral condyle were fabricated. TPU implants were composed of an articulating Bionate® II 80A top layer, and a Bionate® 75D bottom layer (DSM Biomedical, Geleen, the Netherlands) which is intended to osseointegrate. A biphasic calcium phosphate coating formulation, optimized during a prior in vitro study, was applied to half of the TPU implants, while the other half was left uncoated. Bi-layered metal implants (articulating cobalt-chromium top layer and titanium bottom layer) were used as positive control implants. Eight implants per group were implanted bilaterally in the medial femoral condyle of the stifle joints in 12 Dutch milk goats. 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scanning was performed at 3 and 12 weeks postoperatively, and the corrected maximum standard uptake values (cSUVmax) was calculated to assess the peri-implant bone metabolism. After sacrifice 12 weeks postoperatively, bone histomorphometric analysis was performed to assess the bone-to-implant contact area (BIC). Student's T-test was used in case of normal distribution and the Mann-Whitney-U-test was used in case of abnormal distribution for comparison of BIC and cSUVmax. The BIC value of 10.27 ± 4.50% (mean ± SD) for the BCP-coated TPU implants was significantly (P=0.03) higher than the 4.50 ± 2.61% for the uncoated TPU implants. The uncoated TPU implants scored significantly (P=0.04) lower than the BIC of 12.81 ± 7.55% for the metal implants, whereas there was no significant difference between BCP-coated TPU implants and the metal implants (P=0.68). There was a strong correlation between the cSUVmax values and the BIC values at 12 weeks (Pearson's R=0.74, P=0.001). The cSUVmax values significantly decreased between 3 and 12 weeks for the metal implants (p=0.04). BCP-coated TPU implants followed a similar trend but did not reach statistical significance (p=0.07). cSUVmax in the uncoated TPU implants did not show a significant difference between the time-points (p=0.31). Osseointegration of BCP-coated TPU implants did not significantly differ from metal implants. 18F-NaF PET-CT is a feasible modality to assess osseointegration patterns and showed a similar trend between the BCP-coated and metal implants. Hence, an implant fully composed of TPU may avoid the typical metal-related drawbacks of currently available FKRIs. Long-term follow-up studies are advocated to address the effects of the implant to the opposing cartilage, and are therefore warranted.
