No abstract

Abstract:A new bioactive bone cement (designated GBC) consisting of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) as an organic matrix and bioactive glass beads as an inorganic filler has been developed. The bioactive beads, consisting of MgO-CaO-SiO 2 -P 2 O 5 -CaF 2 glass, have been newly designed, and a novel PMMA powder was selected. The purpose of the present study was to compare this new bone cement GBC's mechanical properties in vitro and its osteoconductivity in vivo with cements consisting of the same matrix as GBC and either apatite-and wollastonitecontaining glass-ceramic (AW-GC) powder (designated AWC) or sintered hydroxyapatite (HA) powder (HAC). Each filler added to the cements amounted to 70 wt %. The bending strength of GBC was significantly higher than that of AWC and HAC (p < 0.0001). Cements were packed into intramedullar canals of rat tibiae in order to evaluate osteoconductivity as determined by an affinity index. Rats were sacrificed at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after operation. An affinity index, which equaled the length of bone in direct contact with the cement expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface, was calculated for each cement. At each time interval studied, GBC showed a significantly higher affinity index than AWC or HAC up to 8 weeks after implantation (p < 0.03). The value for GBC increased significantly with time up to 8 weeks (p < 0.006). The handling property of GBC was comparable with that of PMMA bone cement. Our study revealed that the higher osteoconductivity of GBC was due to the higher bioactivity of the bioactive glass beads at the cement surface and the lower solubility of the new PMMA powder to MMA monomer. In addition, it was found that the smaller spherical shape and glassy phase of the glass beads gave GBC strong enough mechanical properties to be useful under weight-bearing conditions. GBC shows promise as an alternative with improved properties to the conventionally used PMMA bone cement.

A new bioactive bone cement (designated GBC) consisting of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) as an organic matrix and bioactive glass beads as an inorganic filler has been developed. The bioactive beads, consisting of MgO-CaO-SiO(2)-P(2)O(5)-CaF(2) glass, have been newly designed, and a novel PMMA powder was selected. The purpose of the present study was to compare this new bone cement GBC's mechanical properties in vitro and its osteoconductivity in vivo with cements consisting of the same matrix as GBC and either apatite- and wollastonite-containing glass-ceramic (AW-GC) powder (designated AWC) or sintered hydroxyapatite (HA) powder (HAC). Each filler added to the cements amounted to 70 wt %. The bending strength of GBC was significantly higher than that of AWC and HAC (p < 0.0001). Cements were packed into intramedullar canals of rat tibiae in order to evaluate osteoconductivity as determined by an affinity index. Rats were sacrificed at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after operation. An affinity index, which equaled the length of bone in direct contact with the cement expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface, was calculated for each cement. At each time interval studied, GBC showed a significantly higher affinity index than AWC or HAC up to 8 weeks after implantation (p < 0.03). The value for GBC increased significantly with time up to 8 weeks (p < 0.006). The handling property of GBC was comparable with that of PMMA bone cement. Our study revealed that the higher osteoconductivity of GBC was due to the higher bioactivity of the bioactive glass beads at the cement surface and the lower solubility of the new PMMA powder to MMA monomer. In addition, it was found that the smaller spherical shape and glassy phase of the glass beads gave GBC strong enough mechanical properties to be useful under weight-bearing conditions. GBC shows promise as an alternative with improved properties to the conventionally used PMMA bone cement.

No abstract

Abstract:We took three types of bioactive bone cement (designated AWC, HAC, and TCPC), each with a different bioactive filler, and evaluated the influence of each filler on the mechanical properties and osteoconductivity of the cement. The cements consisted of bisphenol-a-glycidyl methacrylate-based (Bis-GMA based) monomers as an organic matrix, with a bioactive filler of apatite/wollastonite containing glass-ceramic (AW-GC) or sintered hydroxyapatite (HA) or ␤-tricalcium phosphate (␤-TCP) powder. Each filler was mixed with the monomers in proportions of 50, 70, and 80% (w/w), giving a total of nine cement subgroups. The nine subgroups were designated AWC50, AWC70, AWC80, HAC50, HAC70, HAC80, TCPC50, TCPC70, and TCPC80. The compressive and bending strengths of AWC were found to be higher than those of HAC and TCPC for all bioactive filler contents. We also evaluated the cements in vivo by packing them into the intramedullary canals of rat tibiae. To compare the osteoconductivity of the cements, an affinity index was calculated for each cement; it equaled the length of bone in direct apposition to the cement, expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface. Microradiographic examination up to 26 weeks after implantation revealed that AWC showed a higher affinity index than HAC and TCPC for each filler content although the affinity indices of all nine subgroups (especially the AWC and HAC subgroups) increased with time. New bone had formed along the AWC surface within 4 weeks, even in the cement containing AW-GC filler at only 50% (w/w); observation of the cement-bone interfaces using a scanning electron microscope showed that all the cements had directly contacted the bone. At 4 weeks the AWC had bonded to the bone via a 10 m-thick reactive layer; the width of the layer, in which partly degraded AW-GC particles were seen, became slightly thicker with time. On the other hand, in the HACand TCPC-implanted tibiae, some particles on the cement surface were surrounded by new bone and partly absorbed or degraded. The results suggest that the stronger bonding between the inorganic filler and the organic matrix in the AWC cements gave them better mechanical properties. The results also indicate that the higher osteoconductivity of AWC was caused by the higher reactivity of the AW-GC powder on the cement surface.