Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byBertram Watson Modified over 9 years ago
1
Biocompatible Bone Fillers Pelvic Osteolysis Felicia Shay Computer Integrated Surgery II
2
Bone Filler Ingrowth
3
Bibliography: Papers S. Takaaki, M. Saito, K. Kawagoe, et al. “New hydroxyapatite composite resin as a bioactive bone cement: improvement of handling and mechanical properties.” Bioceramics. Vol. 11 (1998): World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 251-254. W. F. Mousa, M. Kobayashi, S. Shinzator, et al. “Biological and mechanical properties of commercial PMMA bone cements containing AW-GC filler” Bioceramics. Vol. 12 (1999): World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 545-548. Y. Okada, K. Kawanabe, H. Fujita, et al. “Bonding behavior of bioactive bone cement in segmental replacement of rabbit tibia: comparison with PMMA bone cement.” Bioceramics. Vol. 12 (1999): World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 529-533.
4
Bibliography: Continued N. Asaoka, M. Misago, M. Hirano, et al. “Mechanical and chemical properties of the injectable calcium phosphate cement.” Bioceramics. Vol. 12 (1999): World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 525-528. F.C.M. Dreissens, M.G. Boltong, E.A.P. de Maeyer, et al. “Comparative Study of Some Experiemental or Commercial Calcium Phosphate Bone Cements.” Bioceramics. Vol 11 (1998): World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 231-234
5
Test Materials/Composition PMMA PMMA Composites Bioglass PMMA/ Ca/P Composites Ca/P Composites Hydroxyapatite
6
Background Fundamental of: –PMMA –Ca/P –Bioglass Uses Ideal
7
Methods of Testing Cyclic Wear: Compression Tension: Figure 1 X-ray Diffraction: Analyze reaction Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM): Microstructure Injectability Setting time
8
Comparison of Ca/P Materials Time (I) Time (F) C (M Pa) Cement Ca/P Immers e Ca/P TCP CaCO3 6.5 (0.5) 8.5 (0.5) 33 (5)1.7051.672 HA9.5 (0.25) 17.0 (1.0) 8 (2)1.7461.616 HA CaCO3 2.75 (0.25) 7.5 (0.5) 48 (3)1.5131.481 Bioglass6.25 (0.25) 10.0 (0.5) 32 (4)N/A
9
Compressive Strength Type of MaterialCompressive Strength (MPa) and Day TCP Composite60 MPa (4 days) 70 MPa (7 days) AP and CaCO333 MPa (1 day) Hydroxyapatite8 MPa (1 day) HA, DCP, CaCo348 MPa (1 day) PMMA based125 MPa (1 day)
10
Bioactive vs PMMA: after time
11
PMMA in Rat Tibia: 8 weeks
12
Weaknesses Lack of: –In vivo testing for some experiences –Long term testing for analysis –Testing of different porousity –Uniform testing for all types of materials Dependency upon: –Mixing –P/L ratio dependent
13
Strengths Uniform Testing methods In vivo like environments Good comparison of materials Length of testing Different: –Composites –P/L ratios
14
Results/Discussion Results Interpretation Inconsistencies Overlapping Resolution Additional studies
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.