Aging
Navigate
Submit an Article
Research Paper|Volume 13, Issue 3|pp 4291—4298

Histological characteristics of bone in-growth of proximal humeral implants with different spatial structures

Zhe Xue1, Zheng Pei1, Hui Zhang1, Chong Tang1, Junxiu Jia1, Kun Zhang1, Keshi Zhang1, Luning Wang2, Zhenpeng Guan1
  • 1Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Shougang Hospital, ShiJingshan 100144, Beijing, P.R. China
  • 2Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Materials Genome Engineering, School of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Haidian 100083, Beijing, P.R. China
Received: March 11, 2020Accepted: November 13, 2020Published: January 20, 2021
https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.202391

Copyright: © 2021 Xue et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

This study compares the longitudinal histological characteristics of proximal humeral implants with different spatial structures in rabbits. Thirty skeletally-mature male rabbits were divided into a trabecular structure group and regular hexahedron structure group according to the different spatial structures of a biological titanium alloy screw inserted into the greater tuberosity of the proximal humerus. Samples were collected 3, 6, and 12 weeks after the implantation surgery. Histological results showed that the amount of bone in-growth in the porous cavity of the screw implant increased over time. Quantitative analysis showed there was significantly more bone in-growth in the trabecular structure group than the classic structure group 3 weeks (25.4% ± 6.9% vs 19.6% ± 3.7%, P < 0.05) and 6 weeks (31.2% ± 1.7% vs 26.9% ± 5.3, P < 0.05) after the implantation surgery. No significant difference was detected between the two groups 12 weeks after the surgery (41.7% ± 2.5% vs 39% ± 4.1%, P > 0.05). Our data found that bone in-growth significantly differed among the three time points (P < 0.05) in both groups, but not between the implants with different spatial structures 12 weeks after the surgery.