In Vivo Aging Test for Bioactive Bone Cements Composed of Glass Bead and PMMA

The degradation of a bioactive bone cement (GBC), consisting of bioact ive MgO-CaO-SiO2-P2O5-CaF2 glass beads and high-molecular-weight polymethyl methacrylate (hPMMA) was evaluated in an in vivo aging test. Hardened rectangular specimens were prepared from two GBC formulations (containing 50%w/w [GBC50] or 60%w/w [GBC60] bioactive beads) and a conventional PMMA bone cement control (CMW-1). Initial bending stre ngths were measured using the three-point bending method. Specimens of all three cements we re then implanted into the dorsal subcutaneous tissue of rats, removed after 3, 6 or 12 months, and test ed for bending strength. The bending strengths (MPa) of GBC50 at baseline (0 months), 3, 6 and 12 mont hs were 136 ±1, 119±3, 106±5 and 104±5, respectively. Corresponding values were 138 ±3, 120±3, 110±2 and 109±5 for GBC60, and 106 ±5, 97±5, 92±4 and 88±4 for CMW-1. Although the bending strengths of all three cements decreased significantly ( p<0.05) from 0 to 6 months, those of GBC50 and GBC60 did not change significantly thereafter, whereas that of CMW-1 declined significantly between 6 and 12 months. Thus, degradation of GBC50 and GBC60 does not appear to continue after 6 months, whereas CMW-1 degrades progressively over 12 months. Moreover, the bending strengths of GBC50 and GBC60 (especially GBC60) were significantly higher than that of CMW-1 throughout. We believe that GBC60 is strong enough for use under weight-bearing conditions and that its mechanical strength is retained in vivo.

[1]  K. Kawanabe,et al.  PMMA-based bioactive cement: effect of CaF2 on osteoconductivity and histological change with time. , 2003, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[2]  Takashi Nakamura,et al.  PMMA-based bioactive cement: effect of glass bead filler content and histological change with time. , 2002, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[3]  Y. Kitamura,et al.  Bioactive bone cement: effect of filler size on mechanical properties and osteoconductivity. , 2001, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[4]  Y. Kitamura,et al.  Bioactive bone cement: Effect of silane treatment on mechanical properties and osteoconductivity. , 2001, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[5]  Y. Kitamura,et al.  A new bioactive bone cement: effect of glass bead filler content on mechanical and biological properties. , 2001, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[6]  M. Neo,et al.  Biological and mechanical properties of PMMA-based bioactive bone cements. , 2000, Biomaterials.

[7]  Y. Kitamura,et al.  Osteoconductivity and Mechanical Properties of a New Bioactive Bone Cement , 2000 .

[8]  K. Kawanabe,et al.  Bone Cement Made of High Molecular Weight PMMA Resin with Bioactive Ceramic Filler Showed Higher Bone-Bonding Strength than That of Bis-GMA Resin and Bioactive Ceramic Fillers , 2000 .

[9]  M. Neo,et al.  Bioactive polymethyl methacrylate-based bone cement: comparison of glass beads, apatite- and wollastonite-containing glass-ceramic, and hydroxyapatite fillers on mechanical and biological properties. , 2000, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[10]  T. Yamamuro,et al.  Aging test and dynamic fatigue test of apatite-wollastonite-containing glass ceramics and dense hydroxyapatite. , 1987, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[11]  T. Yamamuro,et al.  A new glass-ceramic for bone replacement: evaluation of its bonding to bone tissue. , 1985, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[12]  Sumio Sakka,et al.  Mechanical properties of a new type of apatite-containing glass-ceramic for prosthetic application , 1985 .