Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Well-Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty pp 93–102Cite as

The Three Interfaces

  • Chapter

Summary

In this chapter an overview of the experimentally applied research on the three interface characteristics of bone cement is given. With regard to the polymer-monomer interface, in addition to prechilling and vacuum mixing, pre-pressurisation of cement after mixing has been shown to enhance the homogeneity and the composite strength of bone cement. The influence of vacuum on shrinkage is discussed and underlined by experimental findings. The processing of bone cement under vacuum is considered as a milestone not so much for the strengthening of the material but for the revascularisation process and the bond of bone cement to the metal to ensure equal load transmission. The systematic histomorphological work on animal experiments and human retrieval analysis is presented and the important principle of a viable bone-to-cement interface is outlined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bishop NE, Ferguson S, Tepic S. Porosity reduction in bone cement at the cement-stem interface. J Bone Joint Surg 1996; 78B:349–356

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bloebaum RD, Gruen TA, Sarmiento A. Interface and bone response to increased penetration of bone cement. Trans Biomaterials 1984; 84:82

    Google Scholar 

  3. Charnley J. Acrylic cement in orthopaedic surgery. Livingstone, Edinburgh London; 1970

    Google Scholar 

  4. Charnley J. Low friction arthroplasty of the hip: theory and practice. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  5. Charnley J, Crawford WJ. Histology of bone in contact with self-curing acrylic cement. J Bone Joint Surg 1988; 50B:228

    Google Scholar 

  6. Demarest VA, Lautenschlager EP, Wixon RL. Vacuum mixing of acrylic bone cement. Presented at the 9th Annual Meeting of the Society for Biomaterials, Birmingham, Alabama, 1993, p 37

    Google Scholar 

  7. Draenert K. Histomorphology of the bone-to-cement interface: remodeling of the cortex and revascularization of the medullary canal in animal experiments. The John Charnley Award Paper. In: The Hip. Proceedings of the ninth open scientific meeting of the Hip Society. Mosby, St Louis Toronto London, 1981, pp 70–110

    Google Scholar 

  8. Draenert K. Histomorphological observations on experiments to improve the bone-to-cement contact. Nicholas Andry Award Paper. Paper presented at the thirty-eight annual meeting of the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons held in Vancouver, 1986; March 27–31. Philadelphia: Lippincott

    Google Scholar 

  9. Draenert K. Zur Technik der Zementverankerung. Forschung und Fortbildung in der Chirurgie des Bewegungsapparates 1. Art and Science, München, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  10. Draenert KD, Rudigier J, Willenegger H. Tierexperimentelle Studie zur Histomorphologie des Knochen-Zement-Kontaktes. Helv Chir Acta 1976; 43:769–773

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Draenert KD, Draenert YI, Krauspe R, Bettin D. Strain adaptive bone remodelling in total joint replacement. Clin Orthop 2005; 430:12–27

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Draenert KD, Rudigier J. Histomorphologie des Knochen-Zement-Kontaktes. Eine tierexperimentelle Phänomenologie der knöchernen Umbauvorgänge. Chirurg 1978; 49:276–285

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Draenert K, Draenert Y, Garde U, Ulrich C. Manual of cementing technique. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Barcelona Hong Kong London Milano Paris Singapore Tokyo, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  14. Feith R. Side effects of Acrylic Cement Implants into Bone. 1975. Dissertation. Nijmegen: Drukkeri Brakkenstein

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fowler J, Gie GA, Lee AJC, Ling RSM. Experience with the Exeter hip since 1970. Orthop Clin North Am 1970; 19:477–489

    Google Scholar 

  16. Goodman SB, Schatzker J, Sumner-Smith G, Fornasier VL, Gofte N, Hunt C. The effect of the polymethylmethacrylate on bone: an experimental study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1985; 104:150–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Harris WH. Is it advantageous to strengthen the cement-metal interface and use a collar for cemented femoral components of total hip replacements? Clin Orthop 1992; 285:67–72

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Henrichsen E, Jansen K, Kroug-Poulsen W. Experimental investigation of the tissue reaction to acrylic plastics. Acta Orthop Scand 1952; 22:141–146

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hoy ALS, Bloebaum RD, Clarke IC, Sarmiento A. The dynamic bone response to acrylic implantation. Presented at the 30th Annual ORS, Atlanta, Georgia, 1984; February 7–9

    Google Scholar 

  20. Keller JC, Lautenschlager EP. Experimental attempts to reduce acrylic cement porosity. Biomat Med Dev Art Org 1983; 11:221–236

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kühn K D. Bone Cements. Up-to-date comparison of physical and chemical properties of commercial materials. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Barcelona Hong Kong London Milano Paris Singapore Tokyo, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lee AJC, Perkins RD, Ling RSM. Time-dependent properties of polymethylmethacrylate bone cement. In: Older J (ed) Implant bone interface. Springer, London Berlin Heidelberg New York Paris Tokyo Hong Kong, 1990, pp 85–90

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lidgren L, Drar H, Moller J. Strength of polymethylmethacrylate increased by vacuum mixing, Acta Orthop Scand 1984;55(5):536–41

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ling RSM, Hon F. The use of a collar and precoating on cemented femoral stems is unnecessary and detrimental. Clin Orthop 1992; 285:73–83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Macaulay W, DiGiovanni CW, Restrepo A, Saleh KJ, Walsh H, Crosset LS, Peterson MG, Li S, Salvati EA. Differences in bone-cement porosity by vacuum mixing, centrifugation, and hand mixing. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17:569–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Niederer PG, Chiquet C, Eulenberger J. Hüftendoprothesen mit oberflächen-strukturierten Verankerungsschäften. Resultate von statischen Belastungsversuchen. Unfallheilkunde 1985; 81:205–210

    Google Scholar 

  27. Oest O, Müller K, Hupfauer W. Die Knochenzemente. Enke, Stuttgart, 1975

    Google Scholar 

  28. Raab S, Ahmed A M, Provan J W. The quasistatic and fatigue performance of the implant/bone-cement interface. J Biomed Mat Res 1981; 15:159

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Raab S, Ahmed A M, Provan J W. Thin film PMMA precoating for improved bone-cement fixation. J Biomed Mat Res 1982; 16:679

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Shao W R, Foster T. Leland R H, Bachus K N. Atrophy of cancellous bone due to microcasting. 39th Annual Meeting Orthop Research Society San Francisco, 1993, Feb 15–18

    Google Scholar 

  31. Slooff TJH. The influence of acrylic cement. An experimental study. Acta Orthop Scand 1971; 42:465–481

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Soltész U. The influence of loading conditions on the life-times in fatigue testing of bone cements. J Mater Sci Mat Med 1994; 5:654–656

    Google Scholar 

  33. Stachiewicz JW, Miller J, Burke DL. Hoop stress generated by shrinkage of polymethyl-methacrylate as a source of prosthetic loosening. Transactions of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Soc, New Orleans, 1976, p 60

    Google Scholar 

  34. Verdonschot N, Huiskes R. Acrylic cement creeps but does not allow much subsidence of femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79-B:665–669

    Google Scholar 

  35. Willert HG, Puls P. Die Reaktion des Knochens auf Knochenzement bei der Alloarthroplastik der Hüfte. Arch Orthop Unfallchir 1972; 72:33–71

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leiter des Zentrum für Orthopädische, Wissenschaften, Gabriel-Max-Str. 3, 81545, München, Germany

    Dr. med. Klaus Draenert (Professor) & Dr. med. Yvette Draenert

Authors
  1. Dr. med. Klaus Draenert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dr. med. Yvette Draenert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Medizin Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Draenert, K., Draenert, Y. (2005). The Three Interfaces. In: The Well-Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28924-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28924-0_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-24197-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-28924-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation