Javascript must be enabled to continue!
The cement-bone bond is weaker than cement-cement bond in cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty. A comparative biomechanical study
View through CrossRef
This study compares the strength of the native bone-cement bond and the old-new cement bond under cyclic loading, using third generation cementing technique, rasping and contamination of the surface of the old cement with biological tissue. The possible advantages of additional drilling of the cement surface is also taken into account. Femoral heads from 21 patients who underwent a total hip arthroplasty performed for hip arthritis were used to prepare bone-cement samples. The following groups of samples were prepared. A bone—cement sample and a composite sample of a 6 weeks old cement part attached to new cement were tested 24 hours after preparation to avoid bone decay. Additionally, a uniform cement sample was prepared as control (6 weeks polymerization time) and 2 groups of cement-cement samples with and without anchoring drill hole on its surface, where the old cement polymerized for 6 weeks before preparing composite samples and then another 6 weeks after preparation. The uniaxial cyclic tension-compression tests were carried out using the Zwick-Roell Z020 testing machine. The uniform cement sample had the highest ultimate force of all specimens (n = 15; Rm = 3149 N). The composite cement sample (n = 15; Rm = 902 N) had higher ultimate force as the bone-cement sample (n = 31; Rm = 284 N; p <0.001). There were no significant differences between composite samples with 24 hours (n = 15; Rm = 902 N) and 6 weeks polymerization periods (n = 22; Rm = 890 N; p = 0.93). The composite cement samples with drill hole (n = 16; Rm = 607 N) were weaker than those without it (n = 22; Rm = 890 N; p < 0.001). This study shows that the bond between the old and new cement was stronger than the bond between cement and bone. This suggests that it is better to leave the cement that is not loosened from the bone and perform cement in cement revision, than compromising bone stock by removal of the old cement with the resulting weaker cement-bone interface. The results support performing cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty The drill holes in the old cement mantle decrease cement binding strength and are not recommended in this type of surgery.
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Title: The cement-bone bond is weaker than cement-cement bond in cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty. A comparative biomechanical study
Description:
This study compares the strength of the native bone-cement bond and the old-new cement bond under cyclic loading, using third generation cementing technique, rasping and contamination of the surface of the old cement with biological tissue.
The possible advantages of additional drilling of the cement surface is also taken into account.
Femoral heads from 21 patients who underwent a total hip arthroplasty performed for hip arthritis were used to prepare bone-cement samples.
The following groups of samples were prepared.
A bone—cement sample and a composite sample of a 6 weeks old cement part attached to new cement were tested 24 hours after preparation to avoid bone decay.
Additionally, a uniform cement sample was prepared as control (6 weeks polymerization time) and 2 groups of cement-cement samples with and without anchoring drill hole on its surface, where the old cement polymerized for 6 weeks before preparing composite samples and then another 6 weeks after preparation.
The uniaxial cyclic tension-compression tests were carried out using the Zwick-Roell Z020 testing machine.
The uniform cement sample had the highest ultimate force of all specimens (n = 15; Rm = 3149 N).
The composite cement sample (n = 15; Rm = 902 N) had higher ultimate force as the bone-cement sample (n = 31; Rm = 284 N; p <0.
001).
There were no significant differences between composite samples with 24 hours (n = 15; Rm = 902 N) and 6 weeks polymerization periods (n = 22; Rm = 890 N; p = 0.
93).
The composite cement samples with drill hole (n = 16; Rm = 607 N) were weaker than those without it (n = 22; Rm = 890 N; p < 0.
001).
This study shows that the bond between the old and new cement was stronger than the bond between cement and bone.
This suggests that it is better to leave the cement that is not loosened from the bone and perform cement in cement revision, than compromising bone stock by removal of the old cement with the resulting weaker cement-bone interface.
The results support performing cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty The drill holes in the old cement mantle decrease cement binding strength and are not recommended in this type of surgery.
Related Results
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
In a comprehensive and at times critical manner, this volume seeks to shed light on the development of events in Western (i.e., European and North American) comparative literature ...
Complications of revision knee arthroplasty
Complications of revision knee arthroplasty
Due to the growing scale of arthroplasty and the widening of indications for knee joint replacement, the durability of joint functioning has become a critical issue. Untimely diagn...
Poster 107: The Use of Coacervate Sustained Release System to Identify the Most Potent BMP for Bone Regeneration
Poster 107: The Use of Coacervate Sustained Release System to Identify the Most Potent BMP for Bone Regeneration
Objectives: Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) belong to the transforming growth factor superfamily that were first discovered by Marshall Urist. There are 14 BMPs identified to da...
No Decreased Infection Rate When Using Antibiotic-Impregnated Cement in Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty
No Decreased Infection Rate When Using Antibiotic-Impregnated Cement in Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty
Educational Objectives
As a result of reading this article, physicians should be able to:
1.
...
Tapered Modular Femoral Stems for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Show Excellent Mid-Term Survivorship
Tapered Modular Femoral Stems for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Show Excellent Mid-Term Survivorship
Introduction: Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be challenging in the face of proximal femoral bone loss, catastrophic implant failure, or recurrent hip instability. Tapere...
Hand-mixed vancomycin versus commercial tobramycin cement revisited: A study on mechanical and antibacterial properties
Hand-mixed vancomycin versus commercial tobramycin cement revisited: A study on mechanical and antibacterial properties
Purpose: Arthroplasty-related infection has grown worldwide. Revision procedures for infection are associated with longer operating time, superior amounts of blood loss, and substa...
Baseline bone mineral density and bone turnover in pre-operative hip and knee arthroplasty patients
Baseline bone mineral density and bone turnover in pre-operative hip and knee arthroplasty patients
Aims Osteoporosis and abnormal bone metabolism may prove to be significant factors influencing the outcome of arthroplasty surgery, predisposing to complications of aseptic looseni...
The irradiated human mandible
The irradiated human mandible
Mandibular bone is known to be susceptible to irradiation damage, especially when radiation dose exceeds 50 Gy. This can result in compromised wound healing and ultimately osteorad...


