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.

The Effect of Bone Quality on Treatment of Intertrochanteric Fractures with Helical Blade Versus Lag Screw Fixation in Cephalomedulary Nails.

Introduction: The specific aim of this retrospective study was to determine whether bone quality has any effect on the complication rates or overall survivorship between helical blades and lag screws in cephalomedullary nails used for intertrochanteric hip fractures. Methods: The authors reviewed clinical charts and radiographic studies of patients between January 2012 and August 2019. We reviewed radiographic images (pre-, intra-, and post-operative) to evaluate fracture fixation type, fracture reduction grade, and post-operative complications. We collected dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan results (T-score) and serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) isoenzyme activity values to evaluate patient bone quality. Results: We included 303 cases (helical: 197, screw: 106) in the study. Complications were found in 31 (16%) helical blade cases and 23 (22%) lag screw cases. No statistically significant difference was detected when comparing complication rates with patient bone quality between the two groups. These two groups had similar one-year implant survivorship with respect to T-score, the low ALP level group, and normal ALP level group. The helical blade had higher implant survivorship compared to lag screw in five-year survival rate with respect to osteoporotic group, high ALP level group, and normal ALP level group (osteoporotic: 77% vs 69%, high ALP: 73% vs 67%, normal ALP: 70% vs 64%). Conclusions: Similar complication rates were observed between helical blade and lag screw constructs in cephalomedullary femoral nails when accounting for patient bone quality. However, the helical blade design had a higher five-year survival rate.