Advertisement

Antibiotic elution and compressive strength of gentamicin/vancomycin loaded bone cements are considerably influenced by immersion fluid volume

  • Sebastian P. BoelchEmail author
  • Martin C. Jordan
  • Joerg Arnholdt
  • Andre F. Steinert
  • Maximilian Rudert
  • Martin Luedemann
Biomaterials Synthesis and Characterization Original Research
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Biomaterials Synthesis and Characterization

Abstract

The effect of doubling the immersion fluid (eluate) volume on antibiotic concentrations and on mechanical stability from vancomycin and gentamicin loaded bone cements was investigated in vitro. Antibiotic loaded bone cements containing premixed 1.34% gentamicin antibiotic concentration in the cement powder (wt), premixed 1.19% gentamicin wt and 4.76% vancomycin wt and premixed 1.17% wt gentamicin additionally manually blended with 4.68% wt vancomycin were tested. Six specimens per group were immersed in 4 ml and 8 ml for 6 weeks while the eluate was exchanged every 24 h. The antibiotic concentrations were repeatedly measured. Then the specimens were tested for compressive strength. Doubling the eluate volume significantly decreased gentamicin and vancomycin concentrations from 6 h and 24 h on, except for the gentamicin concentration of the additionally manually blended formulation after 3 weeks. The additionally manually blended vancomycin formulation produced significantly higher gentamicin concentrations in 8 ml compared to the other formulations. The reduction ratios of the vancomycin concentrations were significantly smaller than the reduction ratios of the gentamicin concentrations for the manually blended vancomycin formulation. Vancomycin containing formulations showed significantly lower compressive strengths than the vancomycin free formulation after immersion. Doubling the eluate volume lead to significant compressive strength reduction of the vancomycin containing formulations. Eluate volume change influences antibiotic elution dependent on the antibiotic combination and loading technique. The reducing effect is higher on vancomycin than on gentamicin elution. Compressive strength of gentamicin/vancomycin loaded bone cements after immersion is eluate volume dependent.

Notes

Funding

The study was funded by internal sources of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Koenig-Ludwig-Haus and by the Society for the Promotion of Science at the University of Wuerzburg.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Gehrke TAP, Parvizi J. The management of an infected total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2015;10(Suppl A):20–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kapadia BH, Berg RA, Daley JA, Fritz J, Bhave A, Mont MA. Periprosthetic joint infection. Lancet. 2015;23 (10016):386–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cui Q, Mihalko WM, Shields JS, Ries M, Saleh KJ. Antibiotic-impregnated cement spacers for the treatment of infection associated with total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4):871–82.89/4/871 [pii].  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.01070.
  4. 4.
    Duffy RK, Shafritz AB. Bone Cement. J Hand Surg Am. 2011;36(6):1086–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parvizi J, Gehrke T, Chen AF. Proceedings of the international consensus on periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2013;11:1450–2.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.33135. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gasparini G, De Gori M, Calonego G, Della Bora T, Caroleo B, Galasso O. Drug elution from high-dose antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement: a comparative, in vitro study. Orthopedics. 2014;37(11):e999–1005.  https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20141023-57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Galvez-Lopez R, Pena-Monje A, Antelo-Lorenzo R, Guardia-Olmedo J, Moliz J, Hernandez-Quero J. et al. Elution kinetics, antimicrobial activity, and mechanical properties of 11 different antibiotic loaded acrylic bone cement. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014;78(1):70–4.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2013.09.014. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martínez-Moreno J, Mura C, Merino V, Nácher A, Climente M, Merino-Sanjuán M. Study of the influence of bone cement type and mixing method on the bioactivity and the elution kinetics of ciprofloxacin. J Arthroplast. 2015;30(7):1243–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McLaren AC, Nugent M, Economopoulos K, Kaul H, Vernon BL, McLemore R. Hand-mixed and premixed antibiotic-loaded bone cement have similar homogeneity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(7):1693–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0847-1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ensing GT, van Horn JR, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ, Neut D. Copal bone cement is more effective in preventing biofilm formation than Palacos R-G. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(6):1492–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dall GF, Simpson PM, Breusch SJ. In vitro comparison of Refobacin-Palacos R with Refobacin Bone Cement and Palacos R + G. Acta Orthop. 2007;78(3):404–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kühn K-D. PMMA Cements. Heidelberg:Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2014.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Simpson PMDG, Breusch SJ, Heisel C. In vitro elution and mechanical properties of antibiotic-loaded SmartSet HV and Palacos R acrylic bone cements. Der Orthop. 2005;34(12):1255–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paz E,PS-R, Abenojar J, Vaquero-Martín J, Forriol F, Del Real JC. Evaluation of elution and mechanical properties of high-dose antibiotic-loaded bone cement: comparative "in vitro" study of the influence of vancomycin and cefazolin. J Arthroplast. 2015;30(8):1423–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller RMA, Leon C, McLemore R. Mixing method affects elution and strength of high-dose ALBC: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(10):2677–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boelch SP, Jordan MC, Arnholdt J, Rudert M, Luedemann M, Steinert AF. Loading with vancomycin does not decrease gentamicin elution in gentamicin premixed bone cement. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2017;28(7):104.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-017-5915-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petsatodis G, Parziali M, Christodoulou AG, Hatzokos I, Chalidis BE. Prognostic value of suction drain tip culture in determining joint infection in primary and non-infected revision total hip arthroplasty: a prospective comparative study and review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129(12):1645–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-009-0844-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lux PS, Martin JW, Whiteside LA. Reinfusion of whole blood after revision surgery for infected total hip and knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplast. 1993;8(2):125–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    International Organization for Standardization. Implants for surgery—acrylic resins cements. ISO 5833 (2002).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hsieh PH, Tai CL, Lee PC, Chang YH. Liquid gentamicin and vancomycin in bone cement: a potentially more cost-effective regimen. J Arthroplast. 2009;24(1):125–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuhn KD, Renz N, Trampuz A. Local antibiotic therapy. Der Unfallchirurg. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-017-0372-8.
  22. 22.
    Frew NM, Cannon T, Nichol T, Smith TJ, Stockley I. Comparison of the elution properties of commercially available gentamicin and bone cement containing vancomycin with ‘home-made' preparations. Bone Joint J. 2017;1:73–7.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0566.R1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brock H, Moodie PG, Hendricks KJ, McIff T. Compress strength porosity single-antibiot cement vacuum-mixed with vancomycin. J Arthroplast. 2010;25(6):990–7.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lilikakis A, SM. The effect of vancomycin addition to the compression strength of antibiotic-loaded bone cements. Inter Orthop. 2009;33(3):815–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    He Y, Trotignon JP, Loty B, Tcharkhtchi A, Verdu J. Effect of antibiotics on the properties of poly(methylmethacrylate)-based bone cement. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63(6):800–6.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.10405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reinders J, Sonntag R, Kretzer JP. Synovial fluid replication in knee wear testing: an investigation of the fluid volume. J Orthop Res. 2015;33(1):92–7.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.22736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Laine JC, Nguyen TQ, Buckley JM, Kim HT. Effects of mixing techniques on vancomycin-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate. J Arthroplast. 2011;26(8):1562–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hoiby N, Ciofu O, Johansen HK, Song ZJ, Moser C, Jensen PO et al. The clinical impact of bacterial biofilms. Int J Oral Sci. 2011;3(2):55–65.  https://doi.org/10.4248/IJOS11026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian P. Boelch
    • 1
    Email author
  • Martin C. Jordan
    • 2
  • Joerg Arnholdt
    • 1
  • Andre F. Steinert
    • 1
    • 3
  • Maximilian Rudert
    • 1
  • Martin Luedemann
    • 1
  1. 1.Julius-Maximilians University Wuerzburg, Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryKoenig-Ludwig-HausWuerzburgGermany
  2. 2.Julius-Maximilians University Wuerzburg, Department of Trauma, Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital WuerzburgWuerzburgGermany
  3. 3.Hospital Agatharied, Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Norbert-Kerkel PlatzHaushamGermany

Personalised recommendations