Bone bonding at natural and biomaterial surfaces.

Bone bonding is occurring in each of us and all other terrestrial vertebrates throughout life at bony remodeling sites. The surface created by the bone-resorbing osteoclast provides a three-dimensionally complex surface with which the cement line, the first matrix elaborated during de novo bone formation, interdigitates and is interlocked. The structure and composition of this interfacial bony matrix has been conserved during evolution across species; and we have known for over a decade that this interfacial matrix can be recapitulated at a biomaterial surface implanted in bone, given appropriate healing conditions. No evidence has emerged to suggest that bone bonding to artificial materials is any different from this natural biological process. Given this understanding it is now possible to explain why bone-bonding biomaterials are not restricted to the calcium-phosphate-based bioactive materials as was once thought. Indeed, in the absence of surface porosity, calcium phosphate biomaterials are not bone bonding. On the contrary, non-bonding materials can be rendered bone bonding by modifying their surface topography. This paper argues that the driving force for bone bonding is bone formation by contact osteogenesis, but that this has to occur on a sufficiently stable recipient surface which has micron-scale surface topography with undercuts in the sub-micron scale-range.

[1]  R. H. Wasserman,et al.  Calcium-binding proteins and calcium function , 1977 .

[2]  D. E. Ashhurst.  The cartilaginous skeleton of an elasmobranch fish does not heal. , 2004, Matrix biology : journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology.

[3]  J. Davies,et al.  Understanding peri-implant endosseous healing. , 2003, Journal of dental education.

[4]  A. Kölliker.  Die normale Resorption des Knochengewebes und ihre Bedeutung für die Entstehungder typischen Knochenformen , 1873 .

[5]  T Kitsugi,et al.  Ca,P-rich layer formed on high-strength bioactive glass-ceramic A-W. , 1990, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[6]  J. Weinman,et al.  Bone and Bones. Fundamentals of Bone Biology , 1948 .

[7]  J. Davies,et al.  In vitro modeling of the bone/implant interface , 1996, The Anatomical record.

[8]  A. Mushegian,et al.  The evolution of Runx genes I. A comparative study of sequences from phylogenetically diverse model organisms , 2003, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[9]  L. Hench,et al.  Mechanical studies of the bone bioglass interfacial bond. , 1975, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[10]  E. Vajda,et al.  Cement lines of secondary osteons in human bone are not mineral-deficient: new data in a historical perspective. , 2005, The anatomical record. Part A, Discoveries in molecular, cellular, and evolutionary biology.

[11]  T. Albrektsson,et al.  Wound healing in the bone chamber 1. Neoosteogenesis during transition from the repair to the regenerative phase in the rabbit tibial cortex , 1988, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[12]  V. Ebner.  Über den feineren Bau der Knochensubstanz , 1875 .

[13]  K. de Groot,et al.  Tensile tests of interface between bone and plasma-sprayed HA coating-titanium implant. , 1998, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[14]  J. Davies,et al.  Osteoconduction on, and Bonding to, Calcium Phosphate Ceramic Implants , 1995 .

[15]  A. A. Bennett,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF BONE , 1987, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[16]  T. Yamamuro,et al.  Bone-bonding behavior of titanium alloy evaluated mechanically with detaching failure load. , 1995, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[17]  J. Davies,et al.  Scanning Electron Microscopy of the Osteoclast-Bone Interface In Vivo , 1993 .

[18]  John E. Davies,et al.  The bone-biomaterial interface , 1991 .

[19]  J. Tamura,et al.  Histological and mechanical investigation of the bone-bonding ability of anodically oxidized titanium in rabbits. , 2003, Biomaterials.

[20]  M. McKee,et al.  Osteopontin and the Bone Remodeling Sequence , 1995, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[21]  A. Kolliker.  II. On the different types in the microscopic structure of the skeleton of osseous fishes , 1859, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.

[22]  T Yamamuro,et al.  Apatite formation on three kinds of bioactive material at an early stage in vivo: a comparative study by transmission electron microscopy. , 1993, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[23]  P. Hulley,et al.  Bone biology and the pathogenesis of osteoporosis , 2006, Current opinion in rheumatology.

[24]  H. Winet,et al.  Neo-osteogenesis of haversian trabeculae through a bone chamber implanted in a rabbit tibial cortex: A control model , 1990, Calcified Tissue International.

[25]  L L Hench,et al.  Surface-active biomaterials. , 1984, Science.

[26]  S. Teitelbaum,et al.  Bone resorption by osteoclasts. , 2000, Science.

[27]  D. F. Williams,et al.  The Williams dictionary of biomaterials , 1999 .

[28]  E. Margerie,et al.  Assessing a relationship between bone microstructure and growth rate: a fluorescent labelling study in the king penguin chick (Aptenodytes patagonicus) , 2004, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[29]  J B Brunski,et al.  Mechanical and morphologic investigation of the tensile strength of a bone-hydroxyapatite interface. , 1997, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[30]  L. Hench,et al.  Histochemical responses at a biomaterial's interface. , 1974, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[31]  R. Doremus,et al.  Direct electron microscopy studies of the bone-hydroxylapatite interface. , 1984, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[32]  M. McKee,et al.  Ultrastructural, Cytochemical, and Immunocytochemical Studies on Bone and its Interfaces , 1993 .

[33]  J. Davies,et al.  The effect of discrete calcium phosphate nanocrystals on bone-bonding to titanium surfaces. , 2007, Biomaterials.

[34]  J. Davies,et al.  Mechanisms of endosseous integration. , 1998, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[35]  J. Davies,et al.  Deposition of cement at reversal lines in rat femoral bone , 1994, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[36]  L. Hench,et al.  An Investigation of Bonding Mechanisms at the Interface of a Prosthetic Material. , 1970 .

[37]  L. Cooper,et al.  Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part II. In vitro studies. , 1998, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[38]  J. Davies,et al.  The Bone-Biomaterial Interface for Load-Bearing Implants , 1991 .

[39]  J. Davies,et al.  Ultrastructure of the Mineralized Tissue/Calcium Phosphate Interface in Vitro , 1991 .

[40]  J. Glowacki,et al.  Osteoclasts can be induced in fish having an acellular bony skeleton. , 1986, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[41]  P. Härkönen,et al.  Osteoblast-like Cells Complete Osteoclastic Bone Resorption and Form New Mineralized Bone Matrix In Vitro , 2004, Calcified Tissue International.

[42]  S. Khosla,et al.  Remodeling and Vascular Spaces in Bone , 2006, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[43]  W. Bonfield,et al.  8. High-Resolution Electron Microscopy of a Bone Implant Interface , 1991 .