Journal Home > Volume 5 , issue 2

CoCrMo alloys are contraindicated for allergy sufferers. For these patients, uncemented and cemented prostheses made of titanium alloy are indicated. Knee prostheses machined from that alloy, however, may have poor tribological behavior. Therefore, for allergy sufferers, knee replacements in form of cemented high-strength oxide ceramic prostheses which reveal excellent tribological behavior are suitable. In addition, the rate of particle induced aseptic loosening may be reduced. For adhesion of bone cement, the smooth ceramic surface, however, exposes inefficient mechanical retention spots as compared with a textured metal surface. Undercuts generated by corundum blasting, which in the short and intermediate term are highly efficient on a CoCrMo surface, are not appropriate on a ceramic surface due to the brittleness of ceramics. The corresponding textures may initiate cracks which will weaken the strength of a ceramic prosthesis. Due to the lack of textures, mechanical retention is poor or even not existent. Micromotions are facilitated and early aseptic loosening is predictable. Instead silicoating of the ceramic surface will allow specific adhesion and result in better hydrolytic stability of bonding, thereby preventing early aseptic loosening. Silicoating, however, presupposes a clean and chemically active surface which may be achieved by atmospheric plasma or thermal surface treatment. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of silicoating, the bond strengths of atmospheric plasma versus thermal surface treated and silicoated ZPTA (zirconia platelets toughened alumina) surfaces were compared with “as-fired” surfaces by utilizing TiAlV probes (diameter: 6 mm) for traction–adhesive strength test. After preparing samples for traction–adhesive strength test (sequence: ceramic substrate, silicate layer and penetrated silane, protective lacquer (PolyMA), bone cement, TiAlV probe), they were aged up to 150 days at 37 ℃ in Ringer’s solution. The bond strengths observed for all aging intervals were well above 20 MPa and much higher and more hydrolytic stable for silicoated compared with “as-fired” ZPTA samples. Silicoating may be effective for achieving high initial bond strength of bone cement on surfaces of oxide ceramics and is also suitable to stabilize bond strengths in the long term under hydrolytic conditions as present in the human body. Activation by atmospheric plasma or thermal surface treatment seems to be effective prior to silicoating. Due to the proposed silicate layer migration, micromotions and debonding should be widely reduced or even eliminated.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Bone cement adhesion on ceramic surfaces—Surface activation of retention surfaces of knee endoprostheses by atmospheric pressure plasma vs. thermal surface treatment

Show Author's information B. MARXa,b( )C. MARXbR. MARXbU. REISGENaD. C. WIRTZc
ISF Welding and Joining Institute RWTH Aachen University, Pontstrasse 49, 52062 Aachen, Germany
CC&A Medical Components Ltd., Center for Biomedical Engineering, Pauwelsstrasse 17, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Orthopaedics and Traumatology Clinic University Hospital Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Strasse 25, 53127 Bonn, Germany

Abstract

CoCrMo alloys are contraindicated for allergy sufferers. For these patients, uncemented and cemented prostheses made of titanium alloy are indicated. Knee prostheses machined from that alloy, however, may have poor tribological behavior. Therefore, for allergy sufferers, knee replacements in form of cemented high-strength oxide ceramic prostheses which reveal excellent tribological behavior are suitable. In addition, the rate of particle induced aseptic loosening may be reduced. For adhesion of bone cement, the smooth ceramic surface, however, exposes inefficient mechanical retention spots as compared with a textured metal surface. Undercuts generated by corundum blasting, which in the short and intermediate term are highly efficient on a CoCrMo surface, are not appropriate on a ceramic surface due to the brittleness of ceramics. The corresponding textures may initiate cracks which will weaken the strength of a ceramic prosthesis. Due to the lack of textures, mechanical retention is poor or even not existent. Micromotions are facilitated and early aseptic loosening is predictable. Instead silicoating of the ceramic surface will allow specific adhesion and result in better hydrolytic stability of bonding, thereby preventing early aseptic loosening. Silicoating, however, presupposes a clean and chemically active surface which may be achieved by atmospheric plasma or thermal surface treatment. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of silicoating, the bond strengths of atmospheric plasma versus thermal surface treated and silicoated ZPTA (zirconia platelets toughened alumina) surfaces were compared with “as-fired” surfaces by utilizing TiAlV probes (diameter: 6 mm) for traction–adhesive strength test. After preparing samples for traction–adhesive strength test (sequence: ceramic substrate, silicate layer and penetrated silane, protective lacquer (PolyMA), bone cement, TiAlV probe), they were aged up to 150 days at 37 ℃ in Ringer’s solution. The bond strengths observed for all aging intervals were well above 20 MPa and much higher and more hydrolytic stable for silicoated compared with “as-fired” ZPTA samples. Silicoating may be effective for achieving high initial bond strength of bone cement on surfaces of oxide ceramics and is also suitable to stabilize bond strengths in the long term under hydrolytic conditions as present in the human body. Activation by atmospheric plasma or thermal surface treatment seems to be effective prior to silicoating. Due to the proposed silicate layer migration, micromotions and debonding should be widely reduced or even eliminated.

Keywords:

total knee replacement out of oxide ceramics, aseptic loosening, allergenic potential, atmospheric plasma treatment, silicoating, hydrolytic stability
Received: 15 January 2016 Accepted: 16 February 2016 Published: 26 May 2016 Issue date: June 2021
References(38)
[1]
Marx R, Faramarzi RT, Jungwirth F, et al. Silikatbeschichtung zementierter Titanschäfte für die Reduzierung aseptischer Lockerungsraten. Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und Unfallchirurgie 2009, 147: 175-182.
[2]
Oonishi H, Aono M, Murata N, et al. Alumina versus polyethylene in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992, 282: 95-104.
[3]
Oonishi H, Ueno M, Kim SC, et al. Ceramic versus cobalt-chrome femoral components; wear of polyethylene insert in total knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24: 374-382.
[4]
Otto M. Klassifikation bei Protheseninsuffizienz und Partikelbestimmung. Der Pathologe 2008, 29: 232.
[5]
Willmann G. Keramische Pfannen für Hüftendoprothesen. Teil 3: Zum Problem der Osteointegration monolithischer Pfannen. Biomedizinische Technik 1997, 42: 256-263.
[6]
KRÜSS. Solids: Values for the surface free energy of solids. Available at .
[7]
Reisgen U. Private communication. Nov. 20, 2014.
[8]
Nevelos J. Surface engineering of prosthetic knee components. Knee 2004, 11: 163-167.
[9]
Telle R. Keramik. Berlin: Springer, 2007.
[10]
Ihle M, Mai S, Siebert W. Keramik- und Metallköpfe im Dauertest - eine Langzeitanalyse des PE-Abriebs nach 20 Jahren. Orthopädische Praxis 2009, 46: 225-234.
[11]
de Uhlenbrock AG, Püschel V, Püschel K, et al. Influence of time in-situ and implant type on fixation strength of cemented tibial trays—A post mortem retrieval analysis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2012, 27: 929-935.
[12]
Munz D, Fett T. Ceramics. Mechanical Properties, Failure Behaviour, Materials Selection. Berlin: Springer, 1999.
[13]
Musil R, Tiller HJ. Der Kunststoff-Metall-Verbund. Heidelberg: Hüthig, 1989.
[14]
Plueddemann EP. Silane Coupling Agents. New York: Plenum, 1982.
[15]
Kendall K. Adhesion: Molecules and mechanics. Science 1994, 263: 1720-1725.
[16]
Information on .
[17]
Kern M, Barloi A, Yang B. Long-term resin bond strength to zirconia ceramic after different surface conditioning. J Dent Res 2008, 87: 1059.
[18]
Wirtz DC. Eine neue Beschichtungsmethode für zementierte Femurschaftimplantate zur hydrolysestabilen Optimierung des Metall-Knochenzement-Verbundes. Habilitation dissertation. Aachen (Germany): Wissenschaftsverlag Mainz, 2001.
[19]
Edelhoff D, Abuzayeda M, Yildirim M, et al. Adhäsion von Kompositen am hochfesten Strukturkeramiken nach unterschiedlicher Oberflächenbehandlung. DtschZahnärztl Z 2000, 55: 617-623.
[20]
Lastumäki TM, Lassila LVJ, Vallittu PK. The semi-interpenetrating polymer network matrix of fiber-reinforced composite and its effect on the surface adhesive properties. J Mater Sci: Mater M 2003, 14: 803-809.
[21]
Mannocci F, Sherriff M, Watson TF, et al. Penetration of bonding resins into fibre-reinforced composite posts: A confocal microscopic study. Int Endod J 2005, 38: 46-51.
[22]
Habenicht G. Kleben. Grundlagen, Technologien, Anwendungen. Berlin: Springer, 2009.
[23]
Erli HJ, Marx R, Paar O, et al. Surface pretreatments for medical application of adhesion. Biomed Eng Online 2003, 2: 15.
[24]
Marx R, Fischer H. Werkstück und Verfahren zum Herstellen und zum Verwerten des Werkstückes. DE-Patent 19937864, EU-Patent 1 202 702, US-Patent 6, 777, 028, Aug. 1999.
[25]
Edelhoff D, Weber M, Spiekermann H, et al. PVD- Beschichtung für verbesserte Retention glasfaserverstärkter Wurzelkanalstifte. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2006, 116: 992-999.
[26]
Marx R, Faramarzi R, Oberbach T, et al. PVD-Silikat- Beschichtung für die verbesserte Zementhaftung auf Endoprothesen aus ATZ-Dispersionskeramik. Z Orthop Unfall 2012, 150: 40-47.
[27]
Hoffmann H, Spindler J. Verfahren in der Beschichtungs- und Oberflächentechnik. München: Hanser, 2014.
[28]
Leyen S, Vetter S, Plank H. Analysis and investigation of the adhesive strength of ceramic and bone cement in knee arthroplasty. In: Bioceramics in Joint Arthroplasty. Lazenne JY, Dietrich M, Eds. Darmstadt: Steinkopf, 2004: 57–59.
[29]
Bergschmidt P. Präklinische und klinische Testung einer bikondylären Knieendoprothese mit einer neuartigen keramischen Femurkompenente. Habilitation dissertation. Rostock: Universitätsmedizin, 2013.
[30]
Bergschmidt P, Lohmann C, Ganzer D, et al. Knieendoprothetik mit keramischen Femurkomponenten. Der Orthopäde 2011, 40: 224-230.
[31]
Bergschmidt P, Bader R, Ganzer D, et al. Ceramic femoral components in total knee arthroplasty—Two year follow-up results of an international prospective multi-centre study. Open Orthop J 2012, 6: 172-178.
[32]
Information on .
[33]
Information on .
[34]
Information on .
[35]
Information on .
[36]
Vetter St. Analysis and valuation of the adhesive strength of ceramic and bone cement in knee arthroplasty. Diploma Thesis. Denkendorf (Germany): Institute of Textile Technology and Process Engineering, 2003.
[37]
Thomas P, Schuh A, Ring J, et al. Orthopädisch- chirurgische Implantate und Allergien. Der Orthopäde 2008, 37: 75-88.
[38]
Murray MGS, Facchini A, Sicking R, et al. Development of an advanced ceramic/titanium alloy knee joint. Bioceramics 1999, 12: 67-70.
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 15 January 2016
Accepted: 16 February 2016
Published: 26 May 2016
Issue date: June 2021

Copyright

© The author(s) 2016

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the ISF Welding and Joining Institute of the Technical University of Aachen for measuring the surface energies of polished surfaces of tibial parts of CoCrMo and ZPTA prostheses.

Rights and permissions

Open Access The articles published in this journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permission requests may be sought directly from editorial office.

Return