Replies to post #22764 on SiNtx Technologies Inc (SINT)

[boston745]

The 2nd quote occurred years after that implant. As far as Sin on SiN ive seen no studies on it only SiN on Poly. There is also no mention of them developing a SiN on SiN implant since IPO. This suggests to me there was a problem with SiN on SiN. Based on what ive heard this appears to be true. If thats the case Si on Poly still seems to be superior to ZTA.

[boston745]

Proof they were indeed trying to develop SiN on SiN hip at one time. Looks like theyve experienced alot of setbacks.

Amedica (www.amedicacorp.com), which hopes to enter clinicals in
2009 with three hip and knee products – its first generation micro-compos-
ite MC2 hip implant with doped silicon nitride ceramic femoral head; a
second generation MC2 and CSC (cortico-cancellous structured ceramic)
hip system with ceramic cup and large diameter ceramic and metal femoral
heads; and MC2 and CSC knee system with silicon nitride bearing compo-
nents on the femoral side

So it looks as though SiN on Poly is the best the industry can get for now and no ZTA CoC is not superior and due to in vivo conditions being different than in-vitro conditions. Zta CoC wear rates are thus not likely superior to SiN on Poly.