Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Biomechanical, histological and histomorphometric analyses of calcium phosphate cement compared to PMMA for vertebral augmentation in a validated animal model.
Galovich, Luis Alvarez; Perez-Higueras, Antonio; Altonaga, Jose R; Orden, José Manuel Gonzalo; Barba, Maria Lluisa Mariñoso; Morillo, Maria Teresa Carrascal.
Afiliación
  • Galovich LA; Spine Service, Fundación Jiménez DÍaz, Av Reyes Católicos, 2, 28040, Madrid, Spain. lalvarez@fjd.es
Eur Spine J ; 20 Suppl 3: 376-82, 2011 Aug.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21773815
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Calcium phosphate cements (biocements) are alternative materials for use in vertebral augmentation procedures, and are a potential solution to problems associated with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cements. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the utility of percutaneously injected biocements compared with PMMA in a validated animal model of osteoporosis. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Fortyseven augmentation procedures were performed on 11 osteoporotic sheep. 9 vertebrae were augmented with PMMA and 38 with a biocement. The animals were killed in four groups at 7 days, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after intervention. Radiological study and TC of the pieces were obtained to evaluate for leakage, cement diffusion, and integration. In total, 26 biomechanic studies and 27 histomorphometry analyses were performed, included control vertebrae.

RESULTS:

In 20.9% of the vertebrae, the hole was empty at sacrifice. The pattern of fracture was heterogeneous, and cement augmentation did not increase vertebral strength or decrease vertebral stiffness compared to control vertebrae, with neither PMMA or biocement. The rate of remodeling of the biocement was not predictable. In the single majority, there is peripheral remodeling, staying the volume of injected biocement stable.

CONCLUSIONS:

Even though this animal model may not be useful to analyze the biomechanical pattern of treated vertebrae, it demonstrates that the percutaneous use of biocements in vertebral augmentation techniques is not predictable. This is one reason not to recommend its use presently as a substitute for PMMA in vertebral reinforcement procedures.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Osteoporosis / Cementos para Huesos / Fosfatos de Calcio / Polimetil Metacrilato / Vertebroplastia Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: Eur Spine J Asunto de la revista: ORTOPEDIA Año: 2011 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: España

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Osteoporosis / Cementos para Huesos / Fosfatos de Calcio / Polimetil Metacrilato / Vertebroplastia Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: Eur Spine J Asunto de la revista: ORTOPEDIA Año: 2011 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: España