Heimke G, Griss P, Jentschura G, Werner E
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg (1978). 1978 Jul 25;91(4):267-76. doi: 10.1007/BF00389609.
Different groups have observed and reported deviating tissue reactions for the same material for bone replacement: for the "bioinert" Al2O3-ceramic close bone contact is mentioned, others report about a soft tissue layer adjacent to the implant; for the "bioactive" glass ceramic interfaces capable to transmit considerable shear forces are described, others found no interface bonding.--The analysis of the results of animal experiments and the evaluation of clinical follow-up studies show that these discrepancies had been caused by the differences of the biomechanical situations in the examined interfaces. It is pointed out that the negligence or not mentioning of the load pattern at the site of examination can lead to misinterpretations about the possibilities and limits of applicability of biomaterials.
对于“生物惰性”的Al2O3陶瓷，提到了紧密的骨接触，而其他研究则报告了植入物附近有一层软组织；对于“生物活性”玻璃陶瓷，描述了其能够传递相当大剪切力的界面，而其他研究则未发现界面结合。动物实验结果分析和临床随访研究评估表明，这些差异是由所检查界面的生物力学情况不同所致。需要指出的是，在检查部位忽略或未提及负荷模式可能会导致对生物材料应用可能性和局限性的误解。
