In vitro comparison of Refobacin-Palacos R with Refobacin Bone Cement and Palacos R + G

Dall, G; Simpson, Philip M.; Breusch, Steffen

doi:10.1080/17453670710013997

Cited by 36 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such minor changes in the chemical properties of the ingredients could affect the end-product (Kühn 2000, Milner 2004, Dall et al. 2007a and b). This explanation was also suggested by an official statement from Heraeus Kulzer, given in Bridgens et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…(2007a) performed an in vitro comparison of mechanical and handling properties between Refobacin Palacos R and the newer Palacos R + G and Refobacin BCR. All 3 cements were found to have comparable mechanical properties, and to release similar amounts of gentamicin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of in vitro studies also brought to light various minor differences between the old and new products in the years that followed (Dall et al. 2007a and b, Bridgens et al. 2008, Kock et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purpose — The bone cement market for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in Norway has been dominated by a few products and distributors. Palacos with gentamicin had a market share exceeding 90% before 2005, but it was then withdrawn from the market and replaced by new slightly altered products. We have compared the survival of TKAs fixated with Palacos with gentamicin with the survival of TKAs fixated with the bone cements that took over the market.Patients and methods — Using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register for the period 1997–2013, we included 26,147 primary TKAs in the study. The inclusion criteria were TKAs fixated with the 5 most used bone cements and the 5 most common total knee prostheses for that time period. 6-year Kaplan-Meier survival probabilities were established for each cement product. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess the association between bone cement product and revision risk. Separate analyses were performed with revision for any reason and revision due to deep infection within 1 year postoperatively as endpoints. Adjustments were made for age, sex, diagnosis, and prosthesis brand.Results — Survival was similar for the prostheses in the follow-up period, between the 5 bone cements included: Palacos with gentamicin, Refobacin Palacos R, Refobacin Bone Cement R (Refobacin BCR), Optipac Refobacin Bone Cement R (Optipac Refobacin BCR), and Palacos R + G.Interpretation — According to our findings, the use of the new bone cements led to a survival rate that was as good as with the old bone cement (Palacos with gentamicin).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Polymethylmethacryl-(PMMA-) bone cement (Palacos ® ) is probably the alloplastic foreign material most frequently used in the decades in which skull base reconstructions have been performed [23], [44]. A great advantage of acrylic cement is its excellent intraoperative formability [23].…”

Section: Hard Tissue Replacementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomaterials in skull base surgery

Maier

2009

GMS Current Topics in Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery; 8:Doc07; ISSN 1865-1011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These new cements are generally equivalent to the previous formulations, although with minor changes in the colourant used to differentiate the cement from the surrounding bone. Dall et al [19] using static strength tests, such as impact, compression, bending and tension tests have found no significant mechanical differences between these cements, although they did see differences in the handling behaviour [20]. However, it is not clear whether any influence will be seen on the fatigue life.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparison of two methods of fatigue testing bone cement

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two different methods have been used to fatigue test four bone cements. Each method has been used previously, but the results have not been compared. One method tests at least 10 samples over a single stress range in tension only and uses Weibull analysis to calculate the median number of cycles to failure and the Weibull modulus. The second test regime uses fewer specimens at various stress levels tested in fully reversed tension-compression, and generates a stress versus number of cycles to failure (S-N) or Wöhler curve. Data from specimens where the fracture surface contains pores greater than 1mm across is rejected. The single stress level test is quicker to perform however, provides only tensile fatigue data, but the material tested includes pores, thus more physiological cement is tested. The multiple stress level testing regime uses combined tension and compression loading and multiple stress levels, thus more physiological loading, but excludes specimens where the defects are greater than 1mm across, so is less representative of cement in vivo. The fatigue lives between the cements were up to a factor 15 different for the single stress level tension only tests, while they were only a factor of 2 different in the fully reversed tension-compression testing. The single stress level results are more effected by surface flaws, thus the differences found using the multiple stress levels are more indicative of differences in the fatigue lives of the cements. However, the single stress level tests are quicker, so are useful for initial screening.

show abstract

In vitro comparison of Refobacin-Palacos R with Refobacin Bone Cement and Palacos R + G

Cited by 36 publications

References 11 publications

Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty

Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty

Biomaterials in skull base surgery

Comparison of two methods of fatigue testing bone cement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About