Improvement of absorbability, osteoconductivity, and strength of a β-tricalcium phosphate spacer for opening wedge high tibial osteotomy: clinical evaluations with 106 patients.

BACKGROUND

An ideal synthetic spacer for medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO) has not yet been developed. The authors have developed a new β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) spacer with 60% porosity (N-CP60) by modifying the micro- and macro-pore structures of a conventional β-TCP spacer (CP60) that is widely used in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to compare the absorbability, osteoconductivity, and in vivo strength of the N-CP60 spacer with those of the CP60 spacer, when used in MOWHTO.

METHODS

First, the porosity, diameter distribution of macro- and micropores, and compressive strength of each β-TCP block were examined using methodology of biomaterial science. Secondly, a clinical study was performed using a total of 106 patients (106 knees) with MOWHTO, who were followed up for 18 months after surgery. In these knees, the N-CP60 and CP-60 spacers were implanted into 49 tibias and 57 tibias, respectively. The absorbability and osteoconductivity were radiologically evaluated by measuring the area of the implanted spacer remaining unabsorbed and assessing with the Hemert's score, respectively. The incidence of cracking in the implanted spacers was determined using computed radiography. Statistical comparisons were made with non-parametric tests. The significance level was set at p = 0.05.

RESULTS

The N-CP60 and CP60 blocks had almost the same porosity (mean, 61.0% and 58.7%, respectively). The diameter of macropores was significantly larger (p < 0.0001) in the N-CP60 block than in the CP60 block, while the diameter of micropores was significantly smaller (p = 0.019) in the N-CP60 block. The ultimate strength of the N-CP60 block (median, 36.8 MPa) was significantly greater (p < 0.01) than that of the CP60 block (31.6 MPa). As for the clinical evaluations, the absorption rate of the N-CP60 spacer at 18 months after implantation (mean, 48.0%) was significantly greater (p < 0.001) than that of the CP60 spacer (29.0%). The osteoconductivity of the N-CP60 spacer was slightly but significantly higher (p = 0.0408) than that of the CP60 spacer only in zone 1. The incidence of in vivo cracking of the posteriorly located N-CP60 spacer at one month (mean, 75.5%) was significantly lower (p = 0.0035) than that of the CP60 spacer (91.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

The absorbability, osteoconductivity, and compressive strength of the new N-CP60 spacer were significantly improved by modifying the macro- and micro-pore structures, compared with the conventional CP60 spacer. The N-CP60 spacer is more clinically useful than the CP60 spacer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

H29-0002.