Dergiler / The European Research Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 5

The effect of teicoplanin coating on osteointegration of titanium screws: a biomechanical and histomorphometric study in a rabbit model

Sayfa
401–408
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusions: The results showed that titanium screws with teicoplanin coating did not interfere with osteointegration process biomechanically andhistomorphometrically by comparison with screws having no coating so that teicoplanincoating can be considered for use in orthopedic devices and joint prosthesis to prevent the development of infection.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: The aim of this experimental animal study was to make a biomechanical and histomorphometric evaluation of the effects of titanium screws covered with teicoplanin, which is wanted to prevent the development of infection, on osteointegration of the screw.Methods: Twenty New Zealand white rabbits were randomly separated into 2 groups.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:In Group 1, 2 mini screws with teicoplanin coating were placed in the femoral condyles of the right knee and in Group 2, 2 mini screws with no coating.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusions: The results showed that titanium screws with teicoplanin coating did not interfere with osteointegration process biomechanically andhistomorphometrically by comparison with screws having no coating so that teicoplanincoating can be considered for use in orthopedic devices and joint prosthesis to prevent the development of infection.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:teicoplanin · osteointegration · histomorphometry

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this experimental animal study was to make a biomechanical and histomorphometric evaluation of the effects of titanium screws covered with teicoplanin, which is wanted to prevent the development of infection, on osteointegration of the screw.Methods: Twenty New Zealand white rabbits were randomly separated into 2 groups. In Group 1, 2 mini screws with teicoplanin coating were placed in the femoral condyles of the right knee and in Group 2, 2 mini screws with no coating. After 4 weeks, all the animals were sacrificed and prepared for biomechanical and histological examinations. Results: In the pull-out test, the values of Group 1 were found to be higher and in the removal torque test, the values of Group 2 were higher. No positive correlation was found between the pull-out and removal torque tests (r = 0.88). The bone-implant contact value was found to be similar in both groups (p = 0.132). Conclusions: The results showed that titanium screws with teicoplanin coating did not interfere with osteointegration process biomechanically andhistomorphometrically by comparison with screws having no coating so that teicoplanincoating can be considered for use in orthopedic devices and joint prosthesis to prevent the development of infection.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇATALBAŞ, A., AKALIN, Y., ŞAHİN, İ. G., ÇEVİK, N., ÖZKAN, Y., ÖZTÜRK, A. (2020). The effect of teicoplanin coating on osteointegration of titanium screws: a biomechanical and histomorphometric study in a rabbit model. The European Research Journal, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 5, 401–408. https://ajindex.com/articles/360975

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Bruellhoff K, Fiedler J, Möller M, Groll J, Brenner RE. Surface coating strategies to prevent biofilm formation on implant surfaces. Int J Artif Organs 2010;33:646-53
  2. Del Pozo L, Patel, R. Infection associated with prosthetic joints. N Engl J Med 2009;361:787-94
  3. Matthews P, Berendt A, McNally M, Byren I. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection. BMJ 2009;338: b1773. 4. ter Boo GJ, Grijpma DW, Moriarty TF, Richards RG, Eglin D. Antimicrobial delivery systems for local infection prophylaxis in orthopedic and trauma surgery. Biomaterials 2015;52:113-25
  4. Alt V, Bitschnau A, Böhner F, Heerich KE, Magesin E, Sewing A, et al. Effects of gentamicin and gentamicin-RGD coatings on bone ingrowth andbiocompatibility of cementless joint prostheses: an experimental study inrabbits. Acta Biomater 2011;7:1274-80
  5. Guyer RD, Abitbol JJ, Ohnmeiss DD, Yao C. Evaluating osseointegration into a deeply porous titanium scaffold: a biomechanical comparison with peek and allograft. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016;41:E1146-50
  6. Lin X, Yang S, Lai K, Yang H, Webster TJ, Yang L. Orthopedic implant biomaterials with both osteogenic and anti-infection capacities and associated in vivo evaluation methods. Nanomedicine 2017;13:123-42
  7. Eltorai AE, Haglin J, Perera S, Brea BA, Ruttiman R, Garcia DR, et al. Antimicrobial technology in orthopedic and spinal implants. World J Orthop 2016;7:361-9
  8. Ambrose CG, Clyburn TA, Mika J, Gogola GR, Kaplan HB, Wanger A, et al. Evaluation of antibiotic-impregnated microspheres for the prevention of implant-associated orthopedic infections. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014;96:128-34
  9. Ordikhani F, Dehghani M, Simchi A. Antibiotic-loaded chitosanLaponite filmsfor local drug delivery by titanium implants: cell proliferation and drug releasestudies. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2015;26:269
  10. Aykut S, Öztürk A, Özkan Y, Yanik K, Ilman AA, Özdemir R. Evaluation and comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of teicoplanin and clindamycincoated titanium implants. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92-B:159-63
  11. Darouiche RO, Mansouri MD, Zakarevicz D, Alsharif A, Landon GC. In vivo efficacy of antimicrobial-coated devices. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:792-7
  12. Johansson CB, Han CH, Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. A quantitative comparison of machined commercially pure titanium and titanium-aluminum-vanadium implants in rabbit bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:315-21
  13. Lages FS, Douglas-de Oliveira DW, Costa FO. Relationship between