Abstract
Introduction: The currently available mixing systems are compared with regard to handling, mechanical
properties and economical aspects.
Methods: In 8 vacuum mixing systems the handling, pump performance, system tightness, the
used air volume, the filter efficiency, the remaining amounts in the mixing system
and the porosity of the cements are shown in comparison.
Results: The individual examinations of mixing systems show enormous differences, which can
be of significance to the user in the choice of system and, depending on the individual
circumstances, can influence the quality of the mixed cement.
Conclusion: The results enable the user to choose and handle a vacuum mixing system which is
optimally suitable for the individual circumstances in respect to the characteristics
examined.
Key words
Vacuum mixing system - Bone cement - Porosity
References
- 1
Askew M J, Kufel M F, Fleissner P R, Gradisar I A, Salstrom S J, Tan J S.
Effect of vacuum mixing on the mechanical properties of antibiotic-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate
bone cement.
J Biomed Mater Res.
1990;
24
573-580
- 2
Burke D W, Gates E I, Harris W H.
Centrifugation as a method of improving tensile and fatigue properties of acrylic
bone cement.
J Bone Jt Surg.
1984;
66 A
1265-1273
- 3
Charnley J.
Anchorage of the femoral head prosthesis to the shaft of the femur.
J Bone Jt Surg.
1960;
42 B
28-34
- 4
Davies J P, Burke D W, O'Connor D O, Harris W H.
Comparison of the fatigue characteristics of centrifuged and uncentrifuged simplex
P bone cement.
J Orthop Res.
1987;
5
366-371
- 5
Davies J P, Harris W H.
Optimization and comparison of three vacuum mixing systems for porosity reduction
of simplex P cement.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1990;
254
262-269
- 6
Hasenwinkel J M, Lautenschlager E P, Wixson R L, Gilbert J I.
A novel high-viscosity, two-solution acrylic bone cement: Effect of chemical composition
on properties.
J Biomed Mater Res.
1999;
47
36-45
- 7 International Standard: Implants for surgery - Acrylic resin cements. ISO 5833,
1992 (E)
- 8
Jasty M, Davies J P, Daniel M S, O'Connor O, Burke D W, Harrigan T P, Harris W H.
Porosity of various preparations of acrylic bone cements.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1990;
259
122-129
- 9
Lidgren L, Drar H, Möller J.
Strength of polymethylmethacrylate increased by vacuum mixing.
Acta Orthop Scand.
1984;
55
536-541
- 10
Linden U.
Fatigue properties of bone cement; Comparison of mixing techniques.
Acta Orthop Scand.
1989;
60 (Suppl 4)
431-433
- 11
Linden U, Gillquist J.
Air inclusion in bone cement.
Clin Orthop Relat Res.
1989;
247
148-151
- 12
Norman T L, Kish V, Blaha J D, Gruen T A, Hustosky K.
Creep characteristics of hand- and vacuum-mixed acrylic bone cement at elevated stress
levels.
J Biomed Mater Res.
1995;
29
495-501
- 13
Saha S, Pal S.
Mechanical properties of bone cement: A review.
J Biomed Mater Res.
1984;
18
435-462
- 14
Schreurs B W, Spierings P TJ, Huiskes R, Slooff T J.
Effects of preparation techniques on the porosity of acrylic cements.
Acta Orthop Scand.
1988;
59 (Suppl 4)
403-409
- 15
Wixson R L, Lautenschlager E P, Novak M A.
Vacuum mixing of acrylic bone cement.
J Arthroplasty.
1987;
2
141-149
Dr. med. Uwe Horas
Department of Trauma Surgery
Justus-Liebig-University
Rudolf-Buchheim-Street 7
35385 Giessen
Germany
Phone: +49/64 19 94 46 01
Fax: +49/64 19 94 46 09
Email: Uwe.Horas@chiru.med.uni-giessen.de
