Cleemput Simon, Huys Stijn E F, Cleymaet Robbert, Cools Wilfried, Mommaerts Maurice Y
Doctoral School of Life Sciences and Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
European Face Centre, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
Biomater Res. 2021 Jun 10;25(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s40824-021-00216-8.
Maximizing osteointegration potential of three-dimensionally-printed porous titanium (3DPPT) is an ongoing focus in biomaterial research. Many strategies are proposed and tested but there is no weighted comparison of results.
We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase to obtain two pools of 3DPPT studies that performed mechanical implant-removal testing in animal models and whose characteristics were sufficiently similar to compare the outcomes in meta-analyses (MAs). We expanded these MAs to multivariable meta-regressions (moderator analysis) to verify whether statistical models including reported scaffold features (e.g., "pore-size", "porosity", "type of unit cell") or post-printing treatments (e.g., surface treatments, adding agents) could explain the observed differences in treatment effects (expressed as shear strength of bone-titanium interface).
"Animal type" (species of animal in which the 3DPPT was implanted) and "type of post-treatment" (treatment performed after 3D printing) were moderators providing statistically significant models for differences in mechanical removal strength. An interaction model with covariables "pore-size" and "porosity" in a rabbit subgroup analysis (the most reported animal model) was also significant. Impact of other moderators (including "time" and "location of implant") was not statistically significant.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a stronger effect from porosity in a rat than in a sheep model. Additionally, adding a calcium-containing layer does not improve removal strength but the other post-treatments do. Our results provide overview and new insights, but little narrowing of existing value ranges. Consequent reporting of 3DPPT characteristics, standardized comparison, and expression of porosity in terms of surface roughness could help tackle these existing dilemmas.
最大化三维打印多孔钛(3DPPT)的骨整合潜力是生物材料研究中持续关注的焦点。人们提出并测试了许多策略,但尚未对结果进行加权比较。
我们系统检索了PubMed和Embase,以获取两组3DPPT研究,这些研究在动物模型中进行了机械性植入物移除测试,且其特征足够相似,以便在荟萃分析(MA)中比较结果。我们将这些MA扩展为多变量荟萃回归(调节因素分析),以验证包括报告的支架特征(如“孔径”、“孔隙率”、“晶胞类型”)或打印后处理(如表面处理、添加试剂)的统计模型是否可以解释观察到的治疗效果差异(以骨-钛界面的剪切强度表示)。
“动物类型”(植入3DPPT的动物物种)和“后处理类型”(3D打印后进行的处理)是调节因素,为机械移除强度的差异提供了具有统计学意义的模型。在兔子亚组分析(报告最多的动物模型)中,包含协变量“孔径”和“孔隙率”的交互模型也具有显著性。其他调节因素(包括“时间”和“植入位置”)的影响无统计学意义。
讨论/结论:我们的研究结果表明,孔隙率对大鼠的影响比对绵羊模型的影响更大。此外,添加含钙层并不能提高移除强度,但其他后处理可以。我们的结果提供了概述和新见解,但现有值范围的缩小幅度很小。因此,报告3DPPT特征、进行标准化比较以及用表面粗糙度表示孔隙率有助于解决这些现有难题。