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.
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.
Authors: Esther W H Bodde; Otto C Boerman; Frans G M Russel; Antonios G Mikos; Paul H M Spauwen; John A Jansen Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: M D Vlad; E V Sindilar; M L Mariñoso; I Poeată; R Torres; J López; M Barracó; E Fernández Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2009-07-14 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Thomas M Turner; Robert M Urban; Kern Singh; Deborah J Hall; Susan M Renner; Tae-Hong Lim; Michael J Tomlinson; Howard S An Journal: Spine J Date: 2007-03-05 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Anita A Uppin; Joshua A Hirsch; Luis V Centenera; Bernard A Pfiefer; Artemis G Pazianos; In Sup Choi Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Isabel R Dias; José A Camassa; João A Bordelo; Pedro S Babo; Carlos A Viegas; Nuno Dourado; Rui L Reis; Manuela E Gomes Journal: Curr Osteoporos Rep Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 5.096
Authors: Anica Eschler; Paula Roepenack; Jan Roesner; Philipp Karl Ewald Herlyn; Heiner Martin; Martin Reichel; Robert Rotter; Brigitte Vollmar; Thomas Mittlmeier; Georg Gradl Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 3.411