An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of bone cements used in percutaneous vertebroplasty

Stephen M Belkoff, M. Maroney, D. C. Fenton, J. M. Mathis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the strength and stiffness of osteoporotic vertebral bodies (VBs) subjected to compression fractures and subsequently treated with bipedicular injections of various polymethylmethacrylate cements. Ten spines were harvested from nonembalmed female cadavers (age 68.6 ± 13.7 years) and evaluated for bone mineral density using the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry method (t-score = -2.3 ± 2.4). The 50 VBs (L1-L5) were disarticulated, compressed in a materials testing machine to determine initial strength and stiffness, and then assigned to one of six groups. Two of these groups (n = 8, n = 9) concerned experimental cements, the results of which are not reported here. The 33 vertebral bodies in the remaining four groups were left untreated or were repaired using a transpedicular injection of one of three commercially available polymethylmethacrylate cements. These four groups were: a) no treatment (no cement, n = 8); b) Simplex P (n = 9); c) Cranioplastic (n = 8); and d) Osteobond (n = 8). The VBs were then compressed again according to the initial protocol, and posttreatment strength and stiffness were measured. Results suggested that bipedicular injection of Simplex P and Osteobond restored VB stiffness to initial values, whereas VBs injected with Cranioplastic were significantly less stiff than in their initial state. VBs injected with cement (regardless of type) were significantly stronger than they were initially. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalBone
Volume25
Issue numberSUPPL. 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Vertebroplasty
Bone Cements
Methylmethacrylate
Polymethyl Methacrylate
Injections
Materials Testing
Compression Fractures
Photon Absorptiometry
Cadaver
Bone Density
Spine
In Vitro Techniques
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Biomechanical evaluation
  • Bone cement
  • Compression fractures
  • Spine
  • Vertebroplasty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Hematology

Cite this

An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of bone cements used in percutaneous vertebroplasty. / Belkoff, Stephen M; Maroney, M.; Fenton, D. C.; Mathis, J. M.

In: Bone, Vol. 25, No. SUPPL. 1, 08.1999.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Belkoff, Stephen M ; Maroney, M. ; Fenton, D. C. ; Mathis, J. M. / An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of bone cements used in percutaneous vertebroplasty. In: Bone. 1999 ; Vol. 25, No. SUPPL. 1.
@article{3dab864359234e07b5139dd1ab29be23,
title = "An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of bone cements used in percutaneous vertebroplasty",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to determine the strength and stiffness of osteoporotic vertebral bodies (VBs) subjected to compression fractures and subsequently treated with bipedicular injections of various polymethylmethacrylate cements. Ten spines were harvested from nonembalmed female cadavers (age 68.6 ± 13.7 years) and evaluated for bone mineral density using the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry method (t-score = -2.3 ± 2.4). The 50 VBs (L1-L5) were disarticulated, compressed in a materials testing machine to determine initial strength and stiffness, and then assigned to one of six groups. Two of these groups (n = 8, n = 9) concerned experimental cements, the results of which are not reported here. The 33 vertebral bodies in the remaining four groups were left untreated or were repaired using a transpedicular injection of one of three commercially available polymethylmethacrylate cements. These four groups were: a) no treatment (no cement, n = 8); b) Simplex P (n = 9); c) Cranioplastic (n = 8); and d) Osteobond (n = 8). The VBs were then compressed again according to the initial protocol, and posttreatment strength and stiffness were measured. Results suggested that bipedicular injection of Simplex P and Osteobond restored VB stiffness to initial values, whereas VBs injected with Cranioplastic were significantly less stiff than in their initial state. VBs injected with cement (regardless of type) were significantly stronger than they were initially. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.",
keywords = "Biomechanical evaluation, Bone cement, Compression fractures, Spine, Vertebroplasty",
author = "Belkoff, {Stephen M} and M. Maroney and Fenton, {D. C.} and Mathis, {J. M.}",
year = "1999",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/S8756-3282(99)00128-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
journal = "Bone",
issn = "8756-3282",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "SUPPL. 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An in vitro biomechanical evaluation of bone cements used in percutaneous vertebroplasty

AU - Belkoff, Stephen M

AU - Maroney, M.

AU - Fenton, D. C.

AU - Mathis, J. M.

PY - 1999/8

Y1 - 1999/8

N2 - The purpose of this study was to determine the strength and stiffness of osteoporotic vertebral bodies (VBs) subjected to compression fractures and subsequently treated with bipedicular injections of various polymethylmethacrylate cements. Ten spines were harvested from nonembalmed female cadavers (age 68.6 ± 13.7 years) and evaluated for bone mineral density using the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry method (t-score = -2.3 ± 2.4). The 50 VBs (L1-L5) were disarticulated, compressed in a materials testing machine to determine initial strength and stiffness, and then assigned to one of six groups. Two of these groups (n = 8, n = 9) concerned experimental cements, the results of which are not reported here. The 33 vertebral bodies in the remaining four groups were left untreated or were repaired using a transpedicular injection of one of three commercially available polymethylmethacrylate cements. These four groups were: a) no treatment (no cement, n = 8); b) Simplex P (n = 9); c) Cranioplastic (n = 8); and d) Osteobond (n = 8). The VBs were then compressed again according to the initial protocol, and posttreatment strength and stiffness were measured. Results suggested that bipedicular injection of Simplex P and Osteobond restored VB stiffness to initial values, whereas VBs injected with Cranioplastic were significantly less stiff than in their initial state. VBs injected with cement (regardless of type) were significantly stronger than they were initially. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

AB - The purpose of this study was to determine the strength and stiffness of osteoporotic vertebral bodies (VBs) subjected to compression fractures and subsequently treated with bipedicular injections of various polymethylmethacrylate cements. Ten spines were harvested from nonembalmed female cadavers (age 68.6 ± 13.7 years) and evaluated for bone mineral density using the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry method (t-score = -2.3 ± 2.4). The 50 VBs (L1-L5) were disarticulated, compressed in a materials testing machine to determine initial strength and stiffness, and then assigned to one of six groups. Two of these groups (n = 8, n = 9) concerned experimental cements, the results of which are not reported here. The 33 vertebral bodies in the remaining four groups were left untreated or were repaired using a transpedicular injection of one of three commercially available polymethylmethacrylate cements. These four groups were: a) no treatment (no cement, n = 8); b) Simplex P (n = 9); c) Cranioplastic (n = 8); and d) Osteobond (n = 8). The VBs were then compressed again according to the initial protocol, and posttreatment strength and stiffness were measured. Results suggested that bipedicular injection of Simplex P and Osteobond restored VB stiffness to initial values, whereas VBs injected with Cranioplastic were significantly less stiff than in their initial state. VBs injected with cement (regardless of type) were significantly stronger than they were initially. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

KW - Biomechanical evaluation

KW - Bone cement

KW - Compression fractures

KW - Spine

KW - Vertebroplasty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032803123&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032803123&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S8756-3282(99)00128-3

DO - 10.1016/S8756-3282(99)00128-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 10458269

AN - SCOPUS:0032803123

VL - 25

JO - Bone

JF - Bone

SN - 8756-3282

IS - SUPPL. 1

ER -