Small changes in polymer chemistry have a large effect on the bone–implant interface: evaluation of a series of degradable tyrosine-derived polycarbonates in bone defects
In a series of homologous, tyrosine-based polycarbonates, small changes in the chemical structure of the polymer pendent chain were found to affect the bone response in a long-term (1280 d) implantation study. Identically sized pins, prepared from poly(DTE carbonate), poly(DTB carbonate), poly(DTH carbonate), and poly(DTO carbonate) were implanted transcortically in the proximal tibia and the distal femur of skeletally mature New Zealand White Rabbits. The tissue response at the bone-implant interface was characterized in terms of the absence of a fibrous capsule (direct bone apposition, indicative of a bone bonding response) or the presence of a fibrous capsule (referred to as the encapsulation response). The relative frequency of direct bone apposition versus encapsulation was recorded for each polymer throughout the entire period of the study. While all four polymers were tissue compatible, there was a correlation between the chemical structure of the pendent chain and the type of bone response observed, with poly(DTE carbonate) having the highest tendency to elicit direct bone apposition. Based on in vivo degradation data and the ability of model polymers with carboxylate groups at their surface to chelate calcium ions, it is proposed that the ability of poly(DTE carbonate) to bond to bone is caused by the facile hydrolysis of the pendent ethyl ester groups which creates calcium ion chelation sites on the polymer surface. The incorporation of calcium chelation sites into the chemical structure of an implant material appears to be a key requirement if direct bone apposition/bone bonding is desired. This study demonstrates that very subtle changes in the chemical composition of an implant material can have significant effects on the long-term tissue response in a clinically relevant model.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2018.
All research outputs
#9,514,662
of 27,774,969 outputs
Outputs from Biomaterials
#5,094
of 11,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,926
of 117,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomaterials
#24
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,774,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 117,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
