Testing and Performance of Bone Cements
Although all commercially available bone cements are based on polymethylmethacrylate and other acrylic co-polymers, they all differ in their precise chemical formulation and composition. This results in different physical properties like viscosity, heat release, and mechanics. These differences affect surgical handling and clinical outcome. Various testing methods of bone cement are discussed in this chapter. Clinically most relevant is fatigue testing and traditional cements perform best.
KeywordsHeat Generation Fatigue Strength Bone Cement Apparent Viscosity Acrylic Bone Cement
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.ASTM F2118-2001.Test method for constant amplitude of force controlled fatigue testing of acrylic bone cements materials. ASTM International, USA, 2001Google Scholar
- 2.Bellare A, Lee Y-L, Fitz W, Thornhill TS. Using nanotechnology to increase the fatigue life of acrylic bone cement. Transactions 51th Annual Meeting ORS, Washington, February 20–23 2005, p 288Google Scholar
- 3.Caywood GA, Gunasekaran S, Kharas GB. Synthesis and preclinical evaluation of a fast curing bioresorbable composite bone cement. Transactions of the Fifth World Biomaterials Congress, Toronto, Canada, May 29–June 2 1996, p 911Google Scholar
- 4.De Wijn JR. Porous polymethylmethacrylate cement. Dissertation University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, January 1982Google Scholar
- 5.Haboush EJ. A new operation for arthroplasty of the hip based on biomechanics, photoelasticity, fast-setting dental acrylic and other considerations. Scientific Exhibit, AAOS, Chicago, January 1952Google Scholar
- 6.ISO5833:2002. Implants for surgery-Acrylic resin cements. International Standardization Organisation, Switzerland, 2002Google Scholar
- 7.Jacobs CR. Bone cement compositions. World patent PCT/US99/05497, WO99/45978.The Penn State Research Foundation, 1999Google Scholar
- 8.Kruft MAB. New radio-opaque polymeric biomaterials. Dissertation University of Technology Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 1997Google Scholar
- 9.Mahanian S, Piziali RL. Finite element evaluation of the AIA shear specimen for bone. J Biomechanics 1988; 21: 346–356Google Scholar