http://sistemas.eel.usp.br/docentes/arquivos/2166002/1234Nb/Geetha-review2009.pdf

Ti based biomaterials, the ultimate choice for orthopaedic implants – A review

The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) is an independent organization devoted to the development of standards.

American Society for Testing and Materials

Magnesium and its alloys as orthopedic biomaterials: a review.

This review is written with the goal of informing public health concerns related to nanoscience, while raising awareness of nanomaterials toxicity among scientists and manufacturers handling them. We show that humans have always been exposed to nanoparticles and dust from natural sources and human activities, the recent development of industry and combustion-based engine transportation profoundly increasing anthropogenic nanoparticulate pollution. The key to understanding the toxicity of nanoparticles is that their minute size, smaller than cells and cellular organelles, allows them to penetrate these basic biological structures, disrupting their normal function. Among diseases associated with nanoparticles are asthma, bronchitis, lung cancer, neurodegenerative diseases (such as Parkinson`s and Alzheimer`s diseases), Crohn`s disease, colon cancer. Nanoparticles that enter the circulatory system are related to occurrence of arteriosclerosis, and blood clots, arrhythmia, heart diseases, and ultimately cardiac death. We show that possible adverse effects of nanoparticles on human health depend on individual factors such as genetics and existing disease, as well as exposure, and nanoparticle chemistry, size, shape, and agglomeration state. The faster we will understand their causes and mechanisms, the more likely we are to find cures for diseases associated with nanoparticle exposure. We foresee a future with better-informed, and hopefully more cautious manipulation of engineered nanomaterials, as well as the development of laws and policies for safely managing all aspects of nanomaterial manufacturing, industrial and commercial use, and recycling.

Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: Sources and toxicity

This review is presented as a common foundation for scientists interested in nanoparticles, their origin, activity, and biological toxicity. It is written with the goal of rationalizing and informing public health concerns related to this sometimes-strange new science of “nano,” while raising awareness of nanomaterials’ toxicity among scientists and manufacturers handling them. We show that humans have always been exposed to tiny particles via dust storms, volcanic ash, and other natural processes, and that our bodily systems are well adapted to protect us from these potentially harmful intruders. The reticuloendothelial system, in particular, actively neutralizes and eliminates foreign matter in the body, including viruses and nonbiological particles. Particles originating from human activities have existed for millennia, e.g., smoke from combustion and lint from garments, but the recent development of industry and combustion-based engine transportation has profoundly increased anthropogenic particulate pollution. Significantly, technological advancement has also changed the character of particulate pollution, increasing the proportion of nanometer-sized particles-“nanoparticles”-and expanding the variety of chemical compositions. Recent epidemiological studies have shown a strong correlation between particulate air pollution levels, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, various cancers, and mortality. Adverse effects of nanoparticles on human health depend on individual factors such as genetics and existing disease, as well as exposure, and nanoparticle chemistry, size, shape, agglomeration state, and electromagnetic properties. Animal and human studies show that inhaled nanoparticles are less efficiently removed than larger particles by the macrophage clearance mechanisms in the lungs, causing lung damage, and that nanoparticles can translocate through the circulatory, lymphatic, and nervous systems to many tissues and organs, including the brain. The key to understanding the toxicity of nanoparticles is that their minute size, smaller than cells and cellular organelles, allows them to penetrate these basic biological structures, disrupting their normal function. Examples of toxic effects include tissue inflammation, and altered cellular redox balance toward oxidation, causing abnormal function or cell death. The manipulation of matter at the scale of atoms, “nanotechnology,” is creating many new materials with characteristics not always easily predicted from current knowledge. Within the nearly limitless diversity of these materials, some happen to be toxic to biological systems, others are relatively benign, while others confer health benefits. Some of these materials have desirable characteristics for industrial applications, as nanostructured materials often exhibit beneficial properties, from UV absorbance in sunscreen to oil-less lubrication of motors. A rational science-based approach is needed to minimize harm caused by these materials, while supporting continued study and appropriate industrial development. As current knowledge of the toxicology of “bulk” materials may not suffice in reliably predicting toxic forms of nanoparticles, ongoing and expanded study of “nanotoxicity” will be necessary. For nanotechnologies with clearly associated health risks, intelligent design of materials and devices is needed to derive the benefits of these new technologies while limiting adverse health impacts. Human exposure to toxic nanoparticles can be reduced through identifying creation-exposure pathways of toxins, a study that may someday soon unravel the mysteries of diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Reduction in fossil fuel combustion would have a large impact on global human exposure to nanoparticles, as would limiting deforestation and desertification. While nanotoxicity is a relatively new concept to science, this review reveals the result of life’s long history of evolution in the presence of nanoparticles, and how the human body, in particular, has adapted to defend itself against nanoparticulate intruders.

https://avs.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1116/1.2815690

All metals in contact with biological systems undergo corrosion. This electrochemical process leads to the formation of metal ions, which may activate the immune system by forming complexes with endogenous proteins.

Implant degradation products have been shown to be associated with dermatitis, urticaria, and vasculitis. If cutaneous signs of an allergic response appear after implantation of a metal device, metal sensitivity should be considered. Currently, there is no generally accepted test for the clinical determination of metal hypersensitivity to implanted devices.

The prevalence of dermal sensitivity in patients with a joint replacement device, particularly those with a failed implant, is substantially higher than that in the general population.

Until the roles of delayed hypersensitivity and humoral immune responses to metallic orthopaedic implants are more clearly defined, the risk to patients may be considered minimal.

It is currently unclear whether metal sensitivity is a contributing factor to implant failure.

Implant-related metal sensitivity has been well documented in case and group studies; however, overall it remains a relatively unpredictable and poorly understood phenomenon in the context of orthopaedic implant materials1-3. Dermal hypersensitivity to metal is common, affecting about 10% to 15% of the population1,2,4,5. Dermal contact with and ingestion of metals have been reported to cause immune reactions, which most typically manifest as hives, eczema, redness, and itching1,6,7. Historically, the ability of implant materials to demonstrate appropriate host and material responses has resulted in the elimination of candidate materials based on observation of adverse host responses. However, some adverse responses are difficult to characterize in preclinical and clinical settings because of their infrequent or subtle nature. In vivo metal hypersensitivity or hypersensitivity-like reactivity to metallic biomaterials is one such response. Although little is known …

/pdf/metal-sensitivity-in-patients-with-orthopaedic-implants-2vb9pvk2hl.pdf

Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants.

Early failure associated with adverse reactions to metal debris is an emerging problem after hip resurfacing but the exact mechanism is unclear. We analysed our entire series of 660 metal-on-metal resurfacings (Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)) and large-bearing ASR total hip replacements, to establish associations with metal debris-related failures. Clinical and radiological outcomes, metal ion levels, explant studies and lymphocyte transformation tests were performed. A total of 17 patients (3.4%) were identified (all ASR bearings) with adverse reactions to metal debris, for which revision was required. This group had significantly smaller components, significantly higher acetabular component anteversion, and significantly higher whole concentrations of blood and joint chromium and cobalt ions than asymptomatic patients did (all p < 0.001). Post-revision lymphocyte transformation tests on this group showed no reactivity to chromium or cobalt ions. Explants from these revisions had greater surface wear than retrievals for uncomplicated fractures. The absence of adverse reactions to metal debris in patients with well-positioned implants usually implies high component wear. Surgeons must consider implant design, expected component size and acetabular component positioning in order to reduce early failures when performing large-bearing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and replacement.

Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A CONSEQUENCE OF EXCESS WEAR

There is an increasing recognition that, in the long term, total joint replacement may be associated with adverse local and remote tissue responses that are mediated by the degradation products of prosthetic materials. Particular interest has centered on the metal-degradation products of total joint

Metal release in patients who have had a primary total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, controlled, longitudinal study.

Directed cell adhesion remains an important goal of implant and tissue engineering technology. In this study, surface energy and surface roughness were investigated to ascertain which of these properties show more overall influence on biomaterial–cell adhesion and colonization. Jet impingement was used to quantify cellular adhesion strength. Cellular proliferation and extracellular matrix secretion were used to characterize colonization of 3T3MC fibroblasts on: HS25 (a cobalt based implant alloy, ASTM F75), 316L stainless steel, Ti-6Al4V (a titanium implant alloy), commercially pure tantalum (Ta), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), silicone rubber (SR), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). The metals exhibited a nearly five-fold greater adhesion strength than the polymeric materials tested. Generally, surface energy was proportional to cellular adhesion strength. Only polymeric materials demonstrated significant increased adhesion strength associated with increased surface roughness. Cellular adhesion on me...

Evaluation of metallic and polymeric biomaterial surface energy and surface roughness characteristics for directed cell adhesion.

Biologic response to orthopedic implants debris is central to clinical performance. Eventual implant loosening due to aseptic osteolysis has been attributed to local inflammatory responses to wear and corrosion products that are produced by articulating implant interfaces. The response to implant debris is dominated by local immune activation, e.g. macrophages. Immune reactivity has been shown to depend on the number of particles produced or the dose (i.e., the concentration of phagocytosable particles per tissue volume, which can be characterized by knowing the size distribution and amount of debris). Elongated particles (fbers) are generally more pro-inflammatory than round particles, and there is a growing consensus that metals particles are more proinflammatory than polymers in vivo. Generally, to produce an in vitro inflammatory response, particles need to be less than 10 mum, i.e. phagocytosable. However, both soluble and particulate debris derived from Co-Cr-Mo alloy implants can induce monocyte/macrophage activation and secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1beta, TNFalpha, IL-6 and IL-8 via up-regulation of transcription factor NFkappabeta, and activation of inflammasome danger signaling in human macrophages. Not only does activation of local (and systemic) inflammation result in decreased osteoblast function but osteoclast activity increases. Some people are more predisposed to implant debris induced inflammation and metal "allergy" testing services are becoming available. New pathways of implant debris-induced inflammatory reactions continue to be discovered, such as the "danger signaling" inflammasome pathway, which provides new targets for pharmaceutical intervention and improved implant performance.

Nadim J. Hallab

Papers

Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants.

Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A CONSEQUENCE OF EXCESS WEAR

Metal release in patients who have had a primary total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, controlled, longitudinal study.

Evaluation of metallic and polymeric biomaterial surface energy and surface roughness characteristics for directed cell adhesion.

Biologic effects of implant debris.