Implantable medical devices are implanted into the body for various reasons including orthopedic applications (e.g., hip replacement, spinal procedures, knee replacement, bone fracture repair, etc). In view of the structural integrity required by such devices, materials of fabrication are limited and generally consist of metal, plastic and composites.
The benefits derived from these devices are often offset by infection which in some cases can lead to sepsis and death. The most common organisms causing infections are Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus. Staphylococcus epidermidis is a major component of the normal bacterial flora of human skin and mucous membranes. It is a common pathogen that often colonizes patients in hospital settings who have surgical implants due to the microbes' ability to adhere to medical devices and form a biofilm. Additionally, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a type of staphylococcus bacteria that is resistant to many antibiotics is therefore of particular concern. Other gram-positive bacteria, gram-negative bacteria and fungal organisms also are causative organisms that may be problematic.
As microorganisms come in close proximity to the surface of the medical device, they will either be attracted or repelled by it depending on the sum of the different non-specific interactions. In biological systems, hydrophobic/hydrophilic interactions play an important role in the pathogenesis of a wide range of microbial infections.
Many bacteria can form multicellular coatings, or biofilms, on bioengineered implants. Biofilms facilitate the proliferation and transmission of microorganisms by providing a stable and protective environment for their growth. These biofilms may often result in a broad systemic infection.
In many instances, when implants are seeded by organisms which are protected by tenacious biofilms, the implant must be removed and the patient must be treated with a prolonged course of one or more antibiotics in an effort to cure the infection, after which time a new implant is then reimplanted. This process not only subjects the patient to additional trauma and pain but is also extremely expensive.
Not surprising, a great deal of research has been devoted toward preventing the colonization of the surfaces of orthopedic implants by bacterial and fungal organisms with the use of antimicrobial agents such as antibiotics which may be bound to the surface of these devices.
Thermoplastic resins including polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) have been found to be a useful material for these implants. PEEK is particularly suitable because its modulus of elasticity closely matches that of bone. However, PEEK is a hydrophobic material and bacteria tend to adhere easily to these types of surfaces. It is also an organic material which does not carry significant surface charges. Consequently, it may be desirable to develop a medical implant composed of one or more thermoplastic resins that has reduced hydrophobic properties, and/or that has a net negative charge, particularly at an exposed surface when implanted.
The shortcomings of the prior art have been overcome by the embodiments disclosed herein, which relate to devices, such as structural orthobiologic materials, particularly intracorporeal devices such as surgical implants, more particularly orthopedic implants, even more particularly spinal implants. In certain embodiments, the device is osteoconductive and is comprised of a thermoplastic resin such as polyaryletheretherketone (PEEK) or polyetherketoneketone (PEKK), and includes a ceramic species, such as a zeolite, to add hydrophilicity and/or a negative charge to the resin. The ceramic species is devoid of antimicrobial metal ions such as silver, copper, zinc, mercury, tin, lead, gold, bismuth, cadmium, chromium and thallium ions. The ceramic species can be a surface coating, can be incorporated or embedded into the thermoplastic resin, or can be both a surface coating and incorporated or embedded into the resin.
In certain embodiments, the ceramic species is zeolite that is incorporated into the device, especially at the exposed surface of the device. The device is introduced into the body surgically. Radio opacity when viewed under X-ray is retained.
Embodiments disclosed herein relate to the use of ceramics in combination with medical implants comprising thermoplastic resins such as PEEK, PEKK or the like to alter the hydrophobicity of the polymer and impart a negative charge to the polymer such as at an exposed surface of the polymer, in order to minimize or eliminate biofilm formation, and/or to disrupt the integrity of the biofilm and thus its ability to protect bacteria.
Although the present inventors do not intend to be bound to any particular theory of operation, it is believed that biofilms develop because bacteria attach to the implant. The hydrophobic properties of the implant (now with attached bacteria) prevent antimicrobials from attacking the biofilm containing bacteria. The PEEK/zeolite combination with ionic properties, increases the ability of antimicrobial moieties to permeate in and kill the bacterial pathogen rather than be repelled by the hydrophobic surface properties of naked PEEK.
All bacteria adhere better to hydrophobic surfaces, and it also may be more difficult to detach bacteria from hydrophobic surfaces.
The first stage of bone formation is protein adsorption. Typically, proteins that are most important (i.e., RGD peptide) for bone forming cells attach to surfaces that are negatively charged. Additionally, the charged surface allows the proteins to attach in the correct conformation, leading to the attachment of an optimal number of proteins. The Second stage of bone formation is the attachment of pre-osteoblast cells to the adsorped proteins. These cells then form mature osteoblasts, spread phyllopodia and start the osteoblast maturation/proliferation process. Mature osteoblasts produce ECM (extra cellular matrix) which in combination with the cells, mineralizes into woven bone. PEEK is highly hydrophobic which prevents protein adsorption without which the bone forming process cannot start. By incorporating zeolite into the PEEK structure, a negatively charged surface is created which has the potential to initiate the protein adsorption process.
In addition, tissue does not adhere well to pure PEEK; the tissue simply grows up against the PEEK and forms an interface with minimal adhesion between the two materials. This interface provides an area which is very susceptible to formation of bacterial biofilms, even from systemic bacteria which arrive long after surgery. Since the hydrophilic nature and/or charges on the surface of composite of PEEK and ceramics such as zeolite will foster the growth and adhesion of fibroblasts and osteoblasts that interact with developing tissue, the interface will disappear soon after surgery and the potential for biofilm there will be greatly reduced or even eliminated.
In certain embodiments, the device is configured for use in spinal fusion (arthrodesis) which is often employed to stabilize an unstable spinal column due to structural deformity, trauma, degeneration, etc. Fusion is a surgical technique in which one or more vertebrae of the spine are united together (“fused”) to reduce or eliminate relative motion between them or to fix the spatial relationship between them. Spinal fusions include posterolateral fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, anterior/posterior spinal fusion, cervical fusion, thoracic fusion and interlaminar fusion. In certain embodiments, the devices are for insertion in an intervertebral space between adjacent vertebrae. In certain embodiments, a fusion site is identified between adjacent vertebrae and a bone graft is implanted at said site. In certain embodiments, the implant is a spinal interbody cage, including cages comprising titanium, carbon fibers, biocompatible materials such as polyetheretherketone (PEEK), polyetherketoneketone (PEKK), or other synthetic substances. In certain embodiments, zeolite particles are incorporated into the PEEK interbody cage. In certain embodiments, the cage is loaded with osteoconductive and/or osteoinductive agents to promote fusion. Preferably, ceramic particles are incorporated into the resin such that a negative charge is imparted to an exposed surface of the resin. The term “exposed surface” is intended to include one or more surfaces of an implantable device that when implanted, is exposed to or in contact with body tissue and/or fluids.
Either natural zeolites or synthetic zeolites can be used to make the zeolites used in the embodiments disclosed herein. “Zeolite” is an aluminosilicate having a three dimensional skeletal structure that is represented by the formula: XM2/nO.Al2O3.YsiO2.ZH2O, wherein M represents an ion-exchangeable ion, generally a monovalent or divalent metal ion, n represents the atomic valency of the (metal) ion, X and Y represent coefficients of metal oxide and silica respectively, and Z represents the number of water of crystallization. Examples of such zeolites include A-type zeolites, X-type zeolites, Y-type zeolites, T-type zeolites, high-silica zeolites, sodalite, mordenite, analcite, clinoptilolite, chabazite and erionite.
Zeolites can be obtained in master batches of pellets of low density polyethylene, polypropylene, ultra high molecular weight polyethylene or polystyrene, containing suitable amounts of zeolite particles, usually 20 wt. % of zeolite particles. When provided in this form, the pellets of resin containing the zeolite particles can be easily mixed with resins used to make the implants or used to make coatings to be applied to the implants, as set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 6,582,715, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Typical amounts of zeolite particles incorporated in an implant resin range from 0.01 to 10 wt. %, more preferably 0.01 to 8.0 wt. %, most preferably 0.1 to 5.0 wt. %. The method used to coat or otherwise incorporate the ceramic in to the resin is not particularly limited, and can include spraying, painting or dipping. When compounded into PEEK, for example, the PEEK should be protected from sources of moisture and contamination. The compounding can be carried out by blending. The ceramic species can be a surface coating, can be incorporated or embedded into the thermoplastic resin, or can be both a surface coating and incorporated or embedded into the resin.
Other suitable resins include low density polyethylene, polypropylene, ultra high molecular weight polyethylene or polystyrene, polyvinyl chloride, ABS resins, silicones, rubber, and mixtures thereof. These can be formulated to contain suitable amounts of zeolite particles, usually about 20 wt. %. An UHMWPE is preferred for the implant devices.
The masterbatch is a concentrated mixture of pigments and/or additives (e.g., zeolite powder) encapsulated during a heat process into a carrier resin which is then cooled and cut into a granular shape. Using a masterbatch allows the processor to introduce additives to raw polymer (let down resin) economically and simply during the plastics manufacturing process.
The zeolite incorporated into the resin and implanted is devoid of antimicrobial metal ions.
Under conditions of high temperature and high shear, the zeolite is incorporated into the resin, such as by mixing doped metal zeolites into molten PEEK (melting point between 300 and 400° C.), followed by molding and processing of the composite blend.
About 5% by weight of the zeolite powder is mixed thoroughly with the powdered or prilled PEEK. The mixture is brought up to temperature and processed at 400° C. using high shear. The zeolite and PEEK must be dry before processing in order to minimize decomposition and void formation in the product.
The material can be formed into prills for further processing, cast into blocks, extruded into rods or injection molded into the final desired shapes.
The block and rod materials can be machined into shapes which are suitable for use as orthopedic implants or other designs where antimicrobial PEEK finds application. Implants can be designed to provide enhanced surface area by having grooves cut in the surfaces or by producing products with holes in the body of the pieces. Surface area can be further enhanced by sanding or abrasive blasting of the surfaces.
This application is a Continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/696,346 filed Nov. 27, 2012, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference, which is a 371 of PCT/US2011/035468 filed May 6, 2011, which claims priority of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/332,403 filed May 7, 2010, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4088737 | Thomas et al. | May 1978 | A |
4596574 | Urist | Jun 1986 | A |
4612337 | Fox et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4615705 | Scales et al. | Oct 1986 | A |
4775585 | Hagiwara et al. | Oct 1988 | A |
4775586 | Bohrn et al. | Oct 1988 | A |
4861808 | Billington et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4906464 | Yamamoto et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4911898 | Hagiwara et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4911899 | Hagiwara et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4923450 | Maeda et al. | May 1990 | A |
4938955 | Niira et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4938958 | Niira et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4957817 | Chau et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4959268 | Hagiwara et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
5003638 | Miyake et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5100671 | Maeda et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5151122 | Atsumi et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5180585 | Jacobson et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5192590 | Sherman | Mar 1993 | A |
5256390 | Hu | Oct 1993 | A |
5266534 | Atsumi et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5294634 | Yamaguchi | Mar 1994 | A |
5296238 | Sugiura et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5474797 | Sioshansi et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5478563 | Erami | Dec 1995 | A |
5492763 | Barry et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5522904 | Moran et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5556699 | Niira et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5595750 | Jacobson et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5607464 | Trescony et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5609629 | Fearnot et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5614568 | Mawatari et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5647858 | Davidson | Jul 1997 | A |
5688561 | Ichikawa et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5709870 | Yoshimura et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5731087 | Fan et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5753251 | Burrell et al. | May 1998 | A |
5756145 | Darouiche | May 1998 | A |
5770255 | Burrell et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5783570 | Yokota et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
6015816 | Kostyniak et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6090732 | Ito et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6180606 | Chen et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6248342 | Trogolo et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6267590 | Barry et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6296863 | Trogolo et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6436422 | Trogolo et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6471993 | Shastri et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6582715 | Barry et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6585767 | Holley et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6720006 | Hanke et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6723428 | Foss et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6866859 | Trogolo et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6946196 | Foss | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6984392 | Bechert et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6994883 | Layrolle et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7270813 | Shimp et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7354605 | Trogolo et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7357949 | Trogolo et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
8652645 | Dingeldein et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8821912 | Crudden et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8840914 | Crudden et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
9107765 | Ghiselli et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9132576 | Crudden et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
20020099449 | Speitling | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030031687 | Falder et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20040109937 | Jennissen et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20050058682 | Sharratt | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050064176 | Terry | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050149196 | Zucherman et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050170070 | Layrolle et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050203529 | Boehm et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060052479 | Cougoulic | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060069438 | Zucherman et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060161256 | Ziegler et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060177379 | Asgari | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060259020 | Sharratt | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060265065 | Bagga et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060280803 | Kumar et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070015110 | Zhang et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070031515 | Stucky et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070110825 | Taniguchi et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070267029 | Mason | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276337 | Trieu | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070299472 | Brighton | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080032119 | Feldhahn et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080032572 | Burgoyne | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080063671 | Morris et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080208340 | Boyd et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080249637 | Asgari | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080258337 | Ajbani et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090012612 | White et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090238850 | Greener | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100010632 | Bourges et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100099058 | Wang | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100114317 | Lambrecht et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100215643 | Clevenger et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20110022181 | Kasahara et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20120141599 | Johns et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120315340 | Crudden et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120323339 | Graells et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130004585 | Crudden et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130037991 | Crudden et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130073042 | Ghiselli et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20140366362 | Crudden et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
11260 | Oct 2008 | BY |
2171703 | Apr 1995 | CA |
1732025 | Feb 2006 | CN |
100360193 | Jan 2008 | CN |
101234304 | Aug 2008 | CN |
101238166 | Aug 2008 | CN |
3228849 | Feb 1984 | DE |
10055465 | May 2002 | DE |
011594 | Apr 2009 | EA |
0116865 | Aug 1984 | EP |
0253663 | Jan 1988 | EP |
0722660 | Jul 1996 | EP |
1813292 | Aug 2007 | EP |
2848856 | Jun 2004 | FR |
2512324 | May 1990 | JP |
2003-513682 | Apr 2003 | JP |
2004-523302 | Aug 2004 | JP |
10-2009-0031668 | Mar 2009 | KR |
2313370 | Dec 2007 | RU |
2338557 | Nov 2008 | RU |
8401721 | May 1984 | WO |
9907326 | Feb 1999 | WO |
0030697 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0032247 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0064505 | Nov 2000 | WO |
03086495 | Oct 2003 | WO |
2004058319 | Jul 2004 | WO |
2006069677 | Jul 2006 | WO |
2007019461 | Feb 2007 | WO |
2008037751 | Apr 2008 | WO |
2008039488 | Apr 2008 | WO |
2008150867 | Dec 2008 | WO |
2009099559 | Aug 2009 | WO |
2010114827 | Oct 2010 | WO |
2014152649 | Sep 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report/Written Opinion mailed May 13, 2010 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US 10/29180. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Dec. 6, 2011 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US 10/29180. |
Chinese Communication issued Sep. 26, 2012 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. CN 201080015851.3. |
European communication mailed Feb. 6, 2014 in co-pending European patent application No. 10759287.5. |
Russian Communication, with English translation, issued Oct. 9, 2013 in co-pending Russian patent application No. RU 2011144020. |
Russian communication dated Apr. 14, 2014 in co-pending Russian patent application No. 2011144020/15(066044). |
European communication dated Oct. 7, 2015 in co-pending European patent application No. 15163787.3. |
Korean communication, with English translation, dated Jan. 12, 2016 in co-pending Korean patent application No. 10-2011-7023593. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Aug. 19, 2011 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2010/058009. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Jun. 7, 2012 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2010/058009. |
Extended European Search Report mailed May 21, 2013 in co-pending European patent application No. EP 10833925.0. |
Chinese Communication issued Dec. 3, 2013 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. CN 201080062338.X. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, issued Jul. 1, 2014 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. 201080062338.X. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, issued Sep. 30, 2014 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. 201080062338.X. |
Russian communication, with English translation, dated Sep. 15, 2014 in co-pending Russian patent application No. 2012126078/15(040280). |
Russian Communication, with English translation, issued Jan. 12, 2015 in co-pending Russian patent application 2012126078/15(040280). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Aug. 25, 2011 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2010/059868. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Jun. 21, 2012 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2010/059868. |
European Communication mailed Aug. 27, 2013 in co-pending European patent application No. EP 10836743.4. |
European communication dated May 27, 2015 in co-pending European patent application No. 10836743.4. |
English translation of Chinese Communication issued Oct. 30, 2013 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. CN 201080063584.7. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, issued Jun. 17, 2014 in co-pending Chinese patent application No. CN 201080063584.7. |
Russian Communication, with English translation, issued Nov. 20, 2013 in co-pending Russian patent application No. RU 2012129171. |
Russian communication dated Apr. 17, 2014 in co-pending Russian patent application No. 2012129171/15(045686). |
European communication dated Oct. 27, 2015 in co-pending European patent application No. 10836743.4. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Jan. 9, 2012 in corresponding PCT application No. PCT/US2011/035468. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Aug. 7, 2012 in corresponding PCT application No. PCT/US2011/035468. |
European Communication mailed Sep. 4, 2013 in corresponding European patent application No. EP 11778401.7. |
Canadian communication dated Apr. 9, 2014 in corresponding Canadian patent application No. 2,795,836. |
Chinese Communication issued Jan. 6, 2014 in corresponding Chinese patent application No. CN 201180023035.1. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, issued Jul. 7, 2014 in corresponding Chinese patent application No. 201180023035.1. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, mailed Mar. 30, 2015 in corresponding Chinese patent application No. 201180023035.1. |
Mexican communication, with English translation, dated Apr. 17, 2015 in corresponding Mexican patent application No. MX/a/2012/012710. |
Russian communication, with English translation, dated Jun. 3, 2015 in corresponding Russian patent application No. 2012152640. |
Chinese communication, with English translation, dated Oct. 10, 2015 in corresponding Chinese patent application No. 201180023035.1. |
Russian communication, with English Translation, dated Dec. 28, 2015 in corresponding Russian patent application No. 2012152640. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Jul. 21, 2014 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US14/27576. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Apr. 8, 2015 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US14/27576. |
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Dec. 2005, vol. 49, No. 12, pp. 4853-4859, “Role of Silver Ions in Destabilization of Intermolecular Adhesion Forces Measured by Atomic Force Microscopy in Staphylococcus epidermidis Biofilms”, CHAW, et al. |
Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society, vol. 19, No. 1, Sao Paolo, 2008, pp. 1-11, downloaded from the interenet Mar. 1, 2013, “Preparation and characterization of poly(ether ether ketone) derivatives”, Conceicao, et al. |
DiFusion Technologies research paper, created Oct. 14, 2013, “Novel Orthopedic Implant Material Protects Osteoblast Viability in the Presence of Biofilm-Forming MRSA”, 4 pages. |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, vol. 7, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2001, pp. 277-281, “Biofilms and Device-Associated Infections”, Donlan. |
Clinical Microbiology Reviews, Apr. 2002, vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 155-166, Focus, “Bacterial Adhesion: Seen Any Good Biofilms Lately?”, Dunne, Jr., et al. |
“Antimicrobial Efficacy of a novel Orthobiologic PEEK in treating Surgical Site Spine Infections”, http://www.difusiontech.com/wp-content/uploads/NASS-Summer-Conference—2013-Abstract—final2.pdf, NASS Summer Session, Aug. 2-5, 2013, Naples, FL, 2 pages, EASTLACK, et al. |
“Exploring the efficacy of a self-sterilizing orthobiologic PEEK as a viable biomaterial for spinal surgery”, http://www.nassannualmeeting.org/Documents/AMB—FinalProgram.pdf, Abstract, NASS Annual Meeting, Oct. 9-12, 2013 NewOrleans, LA, 3 pages, EASTLACK, et al. |
The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 263, No. 13, May 5, 1988, pp. 6276-6280, “Regulation of the Enterotoxin B Gene in Staphylococcus aureus”, Gaskill, et al. |
Neurosurg. Focus, Apr., 2001, vol. 10(4), “Bone graft substitutes for the promotion of spinal arthrodesis”, pp. 1-5, Helm, et al. |
Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, vol. 77, No. 6, Jun. 2008, 064712, “Photoluminescence of the Dehydrated Ag—type Zeolite A Packed under Air”, pp. 064712-1-064712-7, Hoshino, et al. |
Ann Nutr Metab., 1993, 37(5):245-252, 2 page abstract, “Impaired mechanical strength of bone in experimental copper deficiency”, Jonas, et al. |
European Cells and Materials, vol. 8, 2004, pp. 37-57, “Concise Review of Mechanisms of Bacterial Adhesion to Biomaterials and of Techniques Used in Estimating Bacteria-Material Interactions”, Katsikogianni, et al. |
J Bone Miner Res., Nov. 1992, vol. 7(11), pp. 1281-1289, 1 page Abstract, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1334616, “Zeolite A increases proliferation, differentiation, and transforming growth factor beta production in normal adult human osteoblast-like cells in vitro”, Keeting, et al. |
Medical Design Technology Online, Jan. 28, 2010, 5 pages, http://www.mdtmag.com/scripts/ShowPR.asp? Pubcode=0468,ACCT=0006305&Issue . . . , “Taking a PEEK at Material Options for Orthopedics”, Kinbrum. |
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recommended practice guide, Special Publication 960-17, Sep. 2006, “Porosity and Specific Surface Area Measurements for Solid Materials”, 91 pages, Klobes, et al. |
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., Nov.-Dec. 1981, vol. 161, pp. 154-162, 1 page Abstract, “Antibacterial and osteoinductive properties of demineralized bone matrix treated with silver”, Kramer, et al. |
Medicaldevice-network.com, Jul. 2011, http://www.medicaldevice-network.com/features/feature128303, “PEEK performance: a next-generation biomaterial”, 5 pages, Kurtz. |
Biomaterials, vol. 28, 2007, pp. 4845-4869, “PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants”, Kurtz, et al. |
The Journal of Nutrition, 2002, http://jn.nutrition.org/content/132/10/3135.full.pdf+html, Nutrient Requirements, “Bone Morphology, Strength and Density Are Compromised in Iron-Deficient Rats and Exacerbated by Calcium Restriction”, pp. 3135-3141, Medeiros, et al. |
Journal of Polymer Science: Part B: Polymer Physics, 2004, vol. 42, pp. 1548-1563, “Poly(ether ether ketone)/Poly (aryl ether sulfone) Blends: Melt Rheological Behavior”, Nandan, et al. |
Net Motion, Inc., copyright 2003, http://www.netmotion.com/htm—files/wh—properties.htm#chem, pp. 1-8, Downloaded from internet Mar. 1, 2013, All you want to know about Polyetheretherketone (PEEK), Chemical Resistance of Peek, Peek and Polymer chemical resistance. |
Zinc Toxicity in Humans, 2007, Elsevier B.V. publication, pp. 1-7, Jerome Nriagu, School of Public Health, University of Michigan. |
29th Edition of the Kunststoff Taschenbuch, 2004, pp. 514-517, Oberbach, et al. |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2013, 14:187, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/14/187, 11 pages, “Staphylococcus aureus biofilms decrease osteoblast viability, inhibits osteogenic differentiation, and increases bone resorption in vitro”, Sanchez, Jr., et al. |
J. Phys. Chem. A, 2000, vol. 104, pp. 7473-7483, “Colors of Ag+—Exchanged Zeolite A.”, Seifert, et al. |
Rothman-Simeone-The Spine, 6th Edition, vol. II, Chapter 98, Garfin S., ed., “Postoperative Spinal Infections”, 53 pages, Smith, et al. |
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Silver-Copper Zeolite Data Review, Feb. 15, 1994, 3 pages. |
VICI AG International, 2013, VICI JOUR-Technical Support, Chemical Resistance of PEEK and Other Polymers, Chart displaying PEEK and Polymer Chemical Resistance, 3 pages. |
The Structure and Synthesis of Zeolite Molecular Sieves, Jilin University Press, Aug. 1987, 1st Edition, pp. 6 and 3, 4 pages, Xu, et al. |
“Opisanie tseolita i ego svoystv”, Aug. 4, 2004, https://web.archive.org/web/20040804124452/http://www.ceolit.smila.com/op.htm Apr. 8, 2004, 3 pages. |
Office Action--Restriction—mailed Jan. 23, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/260,571. |
Office Action mailed May 12, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/260,571. |
Final rejection mailed Oct. 16, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/260,571. |
Office action mailed Apr. 22, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/260,571. |
Final rejection mailed Nov. 17, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/260,571. |
Office Action mailed Jan. 10, 2013 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/511,176. |
Final Rejection mailed Oct. 23, 2013 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/511,176. |
Office Action mailed May 20, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/511,176. |
Final Rejection mailed Jan. 5, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/511,176. |
Office Action mailed Mar. 2, 2016 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/511,176. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150342747 A1 | Dec 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61332403 | May 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13696346 | US | |
Child | 14823063 | US |