Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

Dr Pramod K. Puthumanapully

Central Faculty, Advancement

Head of Development Faculty of Medicine
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 3299p.puthumanapully Website

 
 
//

Location

 

AdvancementFaculty BuildingSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Puthumanapully:2013:10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287,
author = {Puthumanapully, PK and Shearwood-Porter, N and Stewart, M and Kowalski, R and Browne, M and Dickinson, A},
doi = {10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287},
journal = {Orthopaedic Proceedings},
pages = {287--287},
title = {The Role of Surface Roughness, Temperature, Viscosity and Application Time of Bone Cement on the Mechanical Interlock With Implant Surfaces-a Parametric Study},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287},
volume = {95-B},
year = {2013}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - IntroductionImplant-cement debonding at the knee has been reported previously [1]. The strength of the mechanical interlock of bone cement on to an implant surface can be associated with both bone cement and implant related factors. In addition to implant surface profile, sub-optimal mixing temperatures and waiting times prior to cement application may weaken the strength of the interlock.AimsThe study aimed to investigate the influence of bone cement related factors such as mixing temperature, viscosity, and the mixing and waiting times prior to application, in combination with implant surface roughness, on the tensile strength at the interface.Materials and MethodsTensile tests were carried out on two types of hand-mixed cement, high (HV) and medium viscosity (MV), sandwiched between two cylindrical Cobalt-Chrome coupons with either smooth (60 grit) or rough (20 grit) surface finishes. 144 Specimens were prepared with a cement thickness layer of 2.5 mm in customised rigs (Figure 1). The samples were grouped and tested at two mixing temperatures (23 and 19 degrees), at different mixing times (HV-30s, MV-45s). Waiting times after mixing were varied between early (1.5 min), optimal (4.5 min) or late (8 min); for HV and 4 min, 7.5 min and 11 min for MV cements. All the samples were cured for 24 hours prior to testing. The peak force and stress was calculated for all specimens.Results and ConclusionSurface Finish: Rough surfaced samples had significantly higher (p < 0.05) mean tensile forces and stress than smooth samples at both 19 and 23 degrees across HV and MV cement types.Cement Type: MV cements, when applied to rough samples with waiting times of 4 minutes at 23 degrees, and 11 minutes at 19 degrees, resulted in the highest peak tensile forces, followed by 7.5 minutes at 23 and 19 degrees respectively (Figure 2).Temperature at different application times for rough and smooth samples: for MV cement, rough samples prepared at 23 degrees, 4 minutes, and smooth sa
AU  - Puthumanapully,PK
AU  - Shearwood-Porter,N
AU  - Stewart,M
AU  - Kowalski,R
AU  - Browne,M
AU  - Dickinson,A
DO  - 10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287
EP  - 287
PY  - 2013///
SN  - 1358-992X
SP  - 287
TI  - The Role of Surface Roughness, Temperature, Viscosity and Application Time of Bone Cement on the Mechanical Interlock With Implant Surfaces-a Parametric Study
T2  - Orthopaedic Proceedings
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287
UR  - https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/doi/abs/10.1302/1358-992X.95BSUPP_34.ISTA2013-287
VL  - 95-B
ER  -
Download