Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Bacterial Adherence to Titanium, Poly-L-Lactic Acid, and Composite Hydroxyapatite and Poly-L-Lactic Acid Interference Screws

Authors: Brendan D, Masini; Daniel J, Stinner; Scott M, Waterman; Joseph C, Wenke; Tad L, Gerlinger;

Bacterial Adherence to Titanium, Poly-L-Lactic Acid, and Composite Hydroxyapatite and Poly-L-Lactic Acid Interference Screws

Abstract

This study investigates a potential site of bacterial adherence, the implant surface, comparing titanium, poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA), and composite hydroxyapatite and poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA-HA) interference screws using a bioluminescent in vitro model. Interference screws of three materials, titanium (Arthrex, Naples, FL), bioabsorbable poly-L-lactic acid (BIORCI, Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA), and bioabsorbable composite hydroxyapatite and poly-L-lactic acid (BIORCI-HA, Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA) were immersed in a broth of bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus. The screws were irrigated and then imaged with a photon-capturing camera system yielding a total photon count correlating with residual adherent bacteria. The titanium screws had the lowest mean total bacterial counts followed by the PLLA-HA screws and with the PLLA screws having the highest mean total counts. The difference in means between the titanium group and the PLLA group was statistically significant (p < .001). Titanium interference screws have less bacterial adherence than comparable bioabsorbable PLLA screws.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Titanium, Durapatite, Polymers, Polyesters, Bone Screws, Materials Testing, Biocompatible Materials, Equipment Design, Lactic Acid, Bacterial Adhesion, Bacterial Load

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!