Table 3.
In vivo animal models for nanosurface modifications.
| Method | Nanoscale Features | Controlled Variables | Animal Model | Outcome | Year | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilmowsky et al. [52] |
Anodization of titanium nanotubes | Titanium nanotubes 20nm in diameter | Nanotube diameter | Pig Frontal Skull | Stimulation of Collagen I expression | 2009 |
| Yang et al. [171] | Electrochemical deposition of nano-HA particles | Nano-HA particles | NA | Rabbit Proximal Tibia | Improved bone-implant SA and contact with increased bone matrix | 2009 |
| Tavares et al. [137] | Oxidative nanopatterning of implant with H2SO4/Hydrogen peroxide | Nanopores of 20-25nm | Nanopores, surface depth and porosity | Dog Mandible | Improves bone to implant surface area and contact with matrix | 2007 |
| Abrahamsson et al. [172] | Titanium blasting with HF acid | Uncharacterised nanofeatures 50-200nm range | NA | Rabbit Femur | Stimulation of osteoblast gene upregulation, matrix formation and bone-implant surface interaction. Good osseointegration at 1 year | 2008 |
| Salou et al. [138] | Nanometer nanotubule surface modified implants | Nanosurface nanotubes37nm - 160nm diameter tubes | Tube dize | Rabbit Femoral Condyle | Bone to implant contact and bone growth values higher in Nanosurface modified implants compared to microsurface implants | 2015 |
| Schliephake [42] | Imbolised VEGF on oligonucleotides anchor strands using sandblasted etched implants | NA | NA | Rat Tibia | Significant improved bone implant contact | 2015 |
| Coelho et al. [141] | Plasma sprayed hydroxyapatite dental implants | NA | 20-50nm tichkness bioceramic treated implants features | Dog tibia | The treated implants with thick coatings did no improve early bone to implant integration | 2009 |
| Kon et al. [173] | Osteochondral scaffold with magnesium hydroxyapatite during self assembly | Chemical surface modification with acetic acid with Mg-HA nanoparticles | Particle layer composition | Sheep Femoral Condyle | improved osseointegration with hydroxyapatite nanoparticles biomimetic scaffold | 2010 |
| Xue et al. [174] | PLGA Nanohydroxyapatite through thermally induced phase seperation | PLGA Nanohydroxyapatite scaffold | scaffold porosity, nanohydroxyapatite particles. | Rat knee | smooth and hyaline like cartilage with abundant glycosaminoglycan and collagen type II deposite | 2010 |
| Kuba et al. [175] | Micropit and nanonodule hybrid topography titanium oxide | Micropits & Nanonodules | Nodules in micropits and nanonodules addition | Rat Femur Model | Improved osteoconductivity | 2009 |
| Omori et al. [176] | Atmospheric plasma treamtent and stem cell immobilisation | Uniform round shaped deposits, dimaeter 350nm | Dog Femur | Continuous bone formation compared to controls | 2015 | |
| Shouten et al. [177] | Electrosprayed calcium phosphate nanoparticles onto implant surfaces | Calcium phosphate nanoparticles | Nanoparticle size, particle spray | Iliac Crest Goats | Bone healing and fixation equal to grit blasted acid etched implants | 2010 |
| Bjursten et al. [178] | Titanium oxide nanotubes vs. titanium oxide gritblasted implant surfaces | Titanium oxide nanotubes | Nanotube size | Rabbit Tibia | Greater bone-implant surface area, calcium and phosphate deposition and bone matrix deposition in nanotube surfaces over grit blasted surfaces | 2009 |
| Meirelles et al. [179, 180] | Nano - Hydroxyapatite modified titanium implant | Hydroxyapatite nanoparticles & nanorough surfaces | Nanoparticle size, surface pores densitiy, depth and concentration | Rabbit Tibia | Rabbit Tibia gap model showed that there was similar bone healing in Nano HA implants to standard implants | 2008 |