Association between blood markers and the progression of osseointegration in percutaneous prostheses patients—A pilot study

Abstract

AbstractPatients implanted with osseointegrated (OI) prosthetic systems have reported vastly improved upper and lower extremity prosthetic function compared with their previous experience with socket‐suspension systems. However, OI systems have been associated with superficial and deep‐bone infections and implant loosening due, in part, to a failure of the osseointegration process. Although monitoring the osseointegration using circulating biomarkers has clinical relevance for understanding the progression of osseointegration with these devices, it has yet to be established. Ten patients were enrolled in this study. Blood samples were collected at pre‐selected times, starting before implantation surgery, and continuing to 12 months after the second surgery. Bone formation markers, bone resorption markers, and circulating amino acids were measured from blood samples. A linear mixed model was generated for each marker, incorporating patient ID and age with the normalized marker value as the response variable. Post hoc comparisons were made between 1 week before Stage 1 Surgery and all subsequent time points for each marker, followed by multiple testing corrections. Serial radiographic imaging of the residual limb containing the implant was obtained during follow‐up, and the cortical index (CI) was calculated for the bone at the porous region of the device. Two markers of bone formation, specifically bone‐specific alkaline phosphatase (Bone‐ALP) and amino‐terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP), exhibited significant increases when compared with the baseline levels of unloaded residual bone prior to the initial surgery, and they subsequently returned to their baseline levels by the 12‐month mark. Patients who experienced clinically robust osseointegration experienced increased cortical bone thickness at the porous coated region of the device. A medium correlation was observed between Bone‐ALP and the porous CI values up to PoS2‐M1 (p = .056), while no correlation was observed for PINP. An increase in bone formation markers and the lack of change observed in bone resorption markers likely reflect increased cortical bone formation induced by the end‐loading design of the Utah OI device used in this study. A more extensive study is required to validate the correlation observed between Bone‐ALP and porous CI values.