Prosthetic Metals: Release, Metabolism and Toxicity
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ijn.s459255
IF: 7.033
2024-06-06
International Journal of Nanomedicine
Abstract:Qiang Zhong, &ast Xin Pan, &ast Yuhang Chen, Qiang Lian, Jian Gao, Yixin Xu, Jian Wang, Zhanjun Shi, Hao Cheng Department of Orthopedics, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China &astThese authors contributed equally to this work Correspondence: Zhanjun Shi; Hao Cheng, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 1838&num Guangzhou North Avenue, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, Tel +86 2062787924, Email ; The development of metallic joint prostheses has been ongoing for more than a century alongside advancements in hip and knee arthroplasty. Among the materials utilized, the Cobalt-Chromium-Molybdenum (Co-Cr-Mo) and Titanium-Aluminum-Vanadium (Ti-Al-V) alloys are predominant in joint prosthesis construction, predominantly due to their commendable biocompatibility, mechanical strength, and corrosion resistance. Nonetheless, over time, the physical wear, electrochemical corrosion, and inflammation induced by these alloys that occur post-implantation can cause the release of various metallic components. The released metals can then flow and metabolize in vivo, subsequently causing potential local or systemic harm. This review first details joint prosthesis development and acknowledges the release of prosthetic metals. Second, we outline the metallic concentration, biodistribution, and elimination pathways of the released prosthetic metals. Lastly, we discuss the possible organ, cellular, critical biomolecules, and significant signaling pathway toxicities and adverse effects that arise from exposure to these metals. Keywords: metallic joint prostheses, prosthetic metal release, potential toxicity and adverse effects Graphical The development of hip and knee replacement has continued for over a century as orthopedic surgeons and researchers strive to identify suitable materials to replace diseased joints (Figure 1). John Murray Carnochan attempted to complete the first mandibular arthroplasty by inserting an oak chip in 1840, 1 marking the introduction of prosthesis implantation. However, the implant failed immediately after, resulting in the loosening of the chip. In the 1860s, Verneuil introduced knee arthroplasty to treat diseased knee rigidity by establishing a septum in the joint space using surrounding soft tissue or fascia. 2 Gluck performed a total hip arthroplasty (THA) in 1891 using a femoral head and acetabular cup constructed from ivory, subsequently fixed with Nickel plated screws. 3 The significance of the stiffness and durability of implantations in bearing joints emerged over time, leading to the utilization of metallic insertion. Robert Jones designed a golden cover four years later to resurface a diseased femoral head. 4 Despite the subsequent utilization of prostheses made from rubber, 5 glass, 3 and stainless steel, 5 long-term outcomes indicated dissatisfaction with the implantations. Attempts to use materials like nylon and glass in diseased knees likewise failed. 2 Smith Peterson debuted the first acetabular cup in 1938 constructed using Cobalt-Chromium-Molybdenum alloy (Co-Cr-Mo), inspired by dental materials. 6 However, a single metallic cup worsened friction between itself and the femoral head, resulting in bone necrosis and pain. To address this, the Judet brothers designed an artificial head with a short stem or a long stem by Austin Moore. 6 Different types of metallic molds were also utilized as femoral or tibial hemiarthroplasties in knee replacements until the mid-twentieth century, inspired by the application of Co-Cr-Mo alloy in diseased hip joints. 2 After 1950, knee prosthesis development focused more on biomechanics than on materials. The transition from fully restrictive hinged prostheses to semi-restrictive and non-restrictive total condylar prostheses for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) today was a result of such focus. 7 On the other hand, John Charnley, regarded as the founder of modern hip replacement, used high molecular polyethylene and acrylic cement to anchor the artificial femoral head in 1958, 3 a milestone in the low friction arthroplasty theory. 3 Since then, arthroplasty has been widely accepted and recognized as a standard treatment for adult joint diseases. 8 Nowadays, press-fit or anatomical prostheses have been developed, with some being modified further by hydroxyapatite coating to enhance stability or durability. 3 Figure 1 History of joint replacement. Figure 2 Biodistribution and excretion of prosthetic metals. Figure 3 Macrophage, osteoblasts and osteoclasts influenced by prosthetic metals. Along with the -Abstract Truncated-
pharmacology & pharmacy,nanoscience & nanotechnology