Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-10T07:47:40.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of an Electromagtnetic Field Used for Bone Gwoth Stimulation on Corrosion of 316L Stainless Steel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Brian Edwards ,
Jessica Posey-Dowty  and
Paul Highm
Brian Edwards
Affiliation:
Howmedica, Research and Develcpment, 359 Veterans Boulevard, Rutherford, New Jersey 070
Jessica Posey-Dowty
Affiliation:
Howmedica, Research and Develcpment, 359 Veterans Boulevard, Rutherford, New Jersey 070
Paul Highm
Affiliation:
Howmedica, Research and Develcpment, 359 Veterans Boulevard, Rutherford, New Jersey 070
Get access

Abstract

A recent development in fracture treatment is that of electrical stimulation to enhance healing. Since the fractured limb receiving treatment may have been inmmbilized or fixed with 316L stainless steel (SS) internal fixation devices, there is an interest in docu.menting how the electromagnetic field affects corrosion of this alloy. The stimulator under investigation produces an electrcnagnetic field having a 3.5 ± IMV pulse height delivered at 75 Hz within the treatment coils. Corrosion, as quantified by analyzing test solutions for Ni and Cr levels, was measured for specimens in and out of the stimulator field.

Three-week in vitro corrosion tests were conducted at 37°C in 0.9% NaCl adjusted to pH levels of 7.4 and 4.0. Specimen were 316L SS rods with surfaces finished to 600 grit. 0-rings were added to form crevices in order to accelerate corrosion. Stimulation was continuous for test specimens. An equal number (ten for each pH) of control specimens received no stimulation. A statistical comparison of the data reveals that at a 95% confidence level the stimulator field did not affect corrosion of the 316L SS.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 110: Symposium M – Biomedical Materials and Devices , 1987 , 539
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. ZerWekh, J.E., Nicar, M.J., Shimizu, T., Stith, W.J., “The Effect of Pulsed Electroaagnetic Fields on the Corrosion of a Chrumium -Cobalt-Nickel Alloy Orthopedic Implant”, Bicmat. 7, 243 (1986).Google Scholar
2. Hunt, T.K., Zederfeldt, B., Goldstick, T.K., “Oxygen and Healing”, Amer. J. Surg. 118, 521 (1969).Google Scholar
3. Versieck, J., “Trace Elements in Human Body Fluids and Tissues”, Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci 22, 97 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Bassett, C.A.L., Pilla, A.A., Pawluk, R.J., “Non-Operative Salvage of Surgically-Resistant Pseudoarthroses and Non-Unions by Pulsing Electrcmagnetic Fields”, Clin. Orth. Rel. Res. 124, 128 (1977).Google Scholar
5. DeHaas, W.G., Watson, J., Morrison, D.M., “INon-Invasive Treatment of Ununited Fractures of the Tibia Using Electrical Stimulation”, J. Bone Jt. Surg. 62–B(4), 7 (1980).Google Scholar
6. Bassett, C.A.L., Mitchell, S.N., Gaston, S.R., “Treatment of Ununited Tibial Diaphyseal Fractures with Pulsing Electroagnetic Fields”, J.Bcne Jt. Surg. 63–A(4), 511 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Zengo, A.N., Bassett, C.A.L., Prountzos, A.L., Pawluk, G., Pilla, A.A., “In Vivo Effects of Direct Current in the Mandible”, J. Dent. Res. 05, 383 (1976).Google Scholar