Skip to main content
. 2017 May 10;7:1689. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-01584-9

Table 1.

Preclinical and clinical studies allowed a comparison and evaluation of the test materials regarding their fibrotic tendencies.

Year[Reference] Author Category [species, application] Type of material Outcome
201532 Kindsfater clinical study [human, knee bearing] Polyethylene PE showed no revisions, osteolysis or implant dissociation.
201033 Deshpande clinical study [human, facial skeletal augmentation] Polyethylene PE had a good long-term survivorship and a low complication incidence.
199334 Wellisz clinical study [human, facial or head reconstruction] porous Polyethylene Porous PE exhibited tissue ingrowth.
200835 Suska animal study [rat, subcutaneous implant] Titanium, cupper Titanium surrounded a thinner fibrous capsule with lower inflammatory cells and vascularity than cupper.
199436 Ungersböck animal study [rabbit, tibia implant] Titanium, stainless steel Fibrous tissue surrounding titanium was thinner and inflammatory cellular numbers were lower compared to stainless steel.
199737 Shannon animal study [rats, subcutaneous implant] Titanium, stainless steel In between titanium and stainless steel no differences in capsule thickness and cell response were found. Qualitative capsule characterization revealed less dense and circumferentially-packed tissue around titanium compared to stainless steel.
198638 Thomsen animal study [rat, abdominal wall implant] Titanium, PTFE Titanium implants were in direct contact with the connective tissue without inflammatory cells. In contrast, a fibrous capsule surrounded the PTFE implants.
197839 von Recum animal study [dog, aortic patch] PTFE, Polyurethan Polyurethan was encapsulated in a fluid cyst, whereas PTFE was moderately surrounded by tightly adherent fibrous tissue.
200240 Batniji animal study [rabbit, subperiosteal pocket implant] PTFE, Silicone The silicone implants elicited compared to PTFE a significantly thicker capsule and less neovascularization.
200541 Ustundag animal study [rabbit, paraglottic space implant] PTFE, Silicone Around silicone a fibrous capsule formed, whereas PTFE limited the formation of a fibrous capsule.
199642 Trumpy clinical study [human, subcutaneous implant] PTFE, hard and soft Silicone All materials developed a fibrous capsule decreasing in order to soft silicone, PTFE and hard silicone.
200343 Siggelkow clinical study [human, breast implant] Silicone A main reason for explantation of intact implants was capsular contracture, which was related to capsule thickness.

These studies emphasized an increasing fibrotic response from PE, titanium, PTFE to silicone. This literature-based biomaterial ranking finally substantiated the validation of our test conditions on their predictive power.