Sedit Kıvanç Muratlı1, Vasfi Karatosun2, Bora Uzun3, İzge Günal2. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Research and Training Hospital, Çanakkale, Turkey. 2. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine Hospital, İzmir, Turkey. 3. Department of Biomechanics, Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine Hospital, İzmir, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were "1" to analyze the compressive and tensile mechanical strength characteristics of tigecycline loaded bone cement and "2" to compare them with those of vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements which are used in prosthetic joint infections complicated with resistant microorganisms. METHODS: In this study, three experimental groups, which consisted of vancomycin (subgroups containing 1 g, 2 g, and 3 g vancomycin), daptomycin (subgroups containing 0.5 g, 1 g, and 1.5 g daptomycin), and tigecycline (subgroups containing 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg tigecycline) and one control group without antibiotics were used. Using a standardized protocol, all antibiotic loaded bone cements were prepared. For each antibiotic group, including the control group, 10 samples were tested. All samples were biomechanically tested in terms of compressive strength and tensile strength. RESULTS: Compression tests showed that all determined antibiotic concentrations resulted in a significant decrease when compared with the control group (p<0.0011). Vancomycin and daptomycin study groups demonstrated lower tensile strength than the control group (p<0.0011). However, comparison of tensile values of tigecycline study groups with the control group revealed no significant difference (p>0.0011). In addition, all statistically significant results from between groups comparisons revealed higher tensile and compressive mechanical strength values for the tigecycline groups (p<0.0011). CONCLUSION: Evidence from this study has demonstrated that tigecycline loaded bone cement may have no mechanical disadvantage compared with vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements in terms of mechanical strength when used at defined concentrations.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were "1" to analyze the compressive and tensile mechanical strength characteristics of tigecycline loaded bone cement and "2" to compare them with those of vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements which are used in prosthetic joint infections complicated with resistant microorganisms. METHODS: In this study, three experimental groups, which consisted of vancomycin (subgroups containing 1 g, 2 g, and 3 g vancomycin), daptomycin (subgroups containing 0.5 g, 1 g, and 1.5 g daptomycin), and tigecycline (subgroups containing 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg tigecycline) and one control group without antibiotics were used. Using a standardized protocol, all antibiotic loaded bone cements were prepared. For each antibiotic group, including the control group, 10 samples were tested. All samples were biomechanically tested in terms of compressive strength and tensile strength. RESULTS: Compression tests showed that all determined antibiotic concentrations resulted in a significant decrease when compared with the control group (p<0.0011). Vancomycin and daptomycin study groups demonstrated lower tensile strength than the control group (p<0.0011). However, comparison of tensile values of tigecycline study groups with the control group revealed no significant difference (p>0.0011). In addition, all statistically significant results from between groups comparisons revealed higher tensile and compressive mechanical strength values for the tigecycline groups (p<0.0011). CONCLUSION: Evidence from this study has demonstrated that tigecycline loaded bone cement may have no mechanical disadvantage compared with vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements in terms of mechanical strength when used at defined concentrations.
Authors: Gladius Lewis; Jennifer L Brooks; Harry S Courtney; Yuan Li; Warren O Haggard Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.176