Jillian V Schommer, Alexander Cm Chong, Troy D Erickson
{"title":"非真空条件下先进的一步法混合系统对丙烯酸骨水泥机械性能的影响","authors":"Jillian V Schommer, Alexander Cm Chong, Troy D Erickson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The specific aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical properties of cement prepared with the advanced one-step mixing system and whether the addition of vacuum conditions yielded an appreciable improvement in the biomechanical strength or overall quality of bone cement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The advanced one-step mixing system was used. Twelve specimens were prepared by mixing under vacuum conditions and 12 specimens were prepared by mixing without a vacuum. Radiographs of cement specimens were analyzed to determine the porosity of the test region. Tensile testing of the specimens was performed with a loading rate of 2.54mm/min at room temperature. The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and the tensile elastic modulus (E) were determined for each sample.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The UTS of the bone cement samples mixed under vacuum conditions were not significantly different than those mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 39±6MPa; non-vacuum: 35±6MPa; p=0.637). The E of samples mixed under vacuum conditions was significantly higher than the bone cement mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 2.78±0.06GPa; non-vacuum: 2.63±0.15GPa; p=0.019). Radiographic images showed samples mixed under vacuum conditions contained fewer defects than the samples mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 3.5%±3.3% (range: 0.0%-9.0%); non-vacuum: 6.9%±1.0% (range: 4.6%-8.2%)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mixing bone cement with the advanced one-step mixing system under vacuum conditions does not produce an appreciable difference in the UTS of the bone cement in a bench biomechanical testing model compared to the bone cement mixed without vacuum. It does, however, create a less porous cement mixture with a higher E compared to cement mixed without vacuum. <b>Level of Evidence: V</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":94233,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"63-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195905/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of the Advanced One-Step Mixing System Under Non-Vacuum on the Mechanical Properties of Acrylic Bone Cement.\",\"authors\":\"Jillian V Schommer, Alexander Cm Chong, Troy D Erickson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The specific aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical properties of cement prepared with the advanced one-step mixing system and whether the addition of vacuum conditions yielded an appreciable improvement in the biomechanical strength or overall quality of bone cement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The advanced one-step mixing system was used. Twelve specimens were prepared by mixing under vacuum conditions and 12 specimens were prepared by mixing without a vacuum. Radiographs of cement specimens were analyzed to determine the porosity of the test region. Tensile testing of the specimens was performed with a loading rate of 2.54mm/min at room temperature. The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and the tensile elastic modulus (E) were determined for each sample.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The UTS of the bone cement samples mixed under vacuum conditions were not significantly different than those mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 39±6MPa; non-vacuum: 35±6MPa; p=0.637). The E of samples mixed under vacuum conditions was significantly higher than the bone cement mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 2.78±0.06GPa; non-vacuum: 2.63±0.15GPa; p=0.019). Radiographic images showed samples mixed under vacuum conditions contained fewer defects than the samples mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 3.5%±3.3% (range: 0.0%-9.0%); non-vacuum: 6.9%±1.0% (range: 4.6%-8.2%)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mixing bone cement with the advanced one-step mixing system under vacuum conditions does not produce an appreciable difference in the UTS of the bone cement in a bench biomechanical testing model compared to the bone cement mixed without vacuum. It does, however, create a less porous cement mixture with a higher E compared to cement mixed without vacuum. <b>Level of Evidence: V</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"63-68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195905/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Influence of the Advanced One-Step Mixing System Under Non-Vacuum on the Mechanical Properties of Acrylic Bone Cement.
Background: The specific aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical properties of cement prepared with the advanced one-step mixing system and whether the addition of vacuum conditions yielded an appreciable improvement in the biomechanical strength or overall quality of bone cement.
Methods: The advanced one-step mixing system was used. Twelve specimens were prepared by mixing under vacuum conditions and 12 specimens were prepared by mixing without a vacuum. Radiographs of cement specimens were analyzed to determine the porosity of the test region. Tensile testing of the specimens was performed with a loading rate of 2.54mm/min at room temperature. The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and the tensile elastic modulus (E) were determined for each sample.
Results: The UTS of the bone cement samples mixed under vacuum conditions were not significantly different than those mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 39±6MPa; non-vacuum: 35±6MPa; p=0.637). The E of samples mixed under vacuum conditions was significantly higher than the bone cement mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 2.78±0.06GPa; non-vacuum: 2.63±0.15GPa; p=0.019). Radiographic images showed samples mixed under vacuum conditions contained fewer defects than the samples mixed without vacuum (vacuum: 3.5%±3.3% (range: 0.0%-9.0%); non-vacuum: 6.9%±1.0% (range: 4.6%-8.2%)).
Conclusion: Mixing bone cement with the advanced one-step mixing system under vacuum conditions does not produce an appreciable difference in the UTS of the bone cement in a bench biomechanical testing model compared to the bone cement mixed without vacuum. It does, however, create a less porous cement mixture with a higher E compared to cement mixed without vacuum. Level of Evidence: V.