Silica glass powder (SG-P) made by a fusing-quenching method was added as a second filler to a bioactive bone cement consisting of MgO-CaO-SiO2-P2O5-CaF2 apatite and wollastonite containing glass-ceramic powder (AW-P) and bisphenol-a-glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA)-based resin, to achieve a higher mechanical strength and better handling properties in use. Five types of cement were used, containing different weight ratios of AW-P/SG-P (Group 1 = 100/0; Group 2 = 75/25; Group 3 = 50/50; Group 4 = 25/75; and Group 5 = 0/100) as filler, to evaluate the effect of SG-P content on the biological, mechanical, and handling properties. The total proportion of filler added to the cements was 85% w/w. The compressive, bending, and tensile strengths and fracture toughness of the cements increased with SG-P content. The viscosity of cements also increased with SG-P content, and every cement could be handled manually. The cements were evaluated in vivo by packing the intramedullary canals of rat tibiae. An affinity index was calculated for each cement; this was the length of bone directly apposed to cement expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface. Histological examination of implanted tibiae for up to 26 weeks showed that the affinity indices decreased with SG-P content and that those of all the cement groups increased with time. At 26 weeks, Groups 1 and 2 had almost identical affnity indices (79% and 75%; no significant difference) but those of the other groups remained at <50%. Group 2 had better mechanical and handling properties than Group 1, and an SG-P content in the filler of no more than 25% w/w did not interfere strongly with the bioactivity of the cement.

A study was conducted to compare the bone-bonding strengths of three types of bioactive bone cement, consisting of either apatite- and wollastonite-containing glass-ceramic (AW-GC) powder, hydroxyapatite (HA) powder, or beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP) powder as an inorganic filler and bisphenol-a-glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA) based resin as an organic matrix. Seventy percent (w/w) filler was added to the cement. Rectangular plates (10 x 15 x 2 mm) of each cement were made and abraded with #2000 alumina powder. After soaking in simulated body fluid for 2 days, the AW cement (AWC) and HA cement (HAC) formed bonelike apatite over their entire surfaces, but the TCP cement (TCPC) did not. Plates of each type of cement were implanted into the tibial metaphyses of male Japanese white rabbits, and the failure loads were measured by a detaching test at 10 and 25 weeks after implantation. The failure loads of AWC, HAC, and TCPC were 3.95, 2.04, and 2.03 kgf at 10 weeks and 4.36, 3.45, and 3.10 kgf at 25 weeks, respectively. The failure loads of the AWC were significantly higher than those of the HAC and TCPC at 10 and 25 weeks. Histological examination by contact microradiogram and Giemsa surface staining of the bone-cement interface revealed that all the bioactive bone cements were in direct contact with bone. However, scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis showed that only AWC had contacted to the bone via a Ca-P rich layer formed at the interface between the AW-GC powder and the bone, which might explain its high bone-bonding strength. Neither the HAC nor the TCPC contacted the bone through such a layer between each powder and the bone, although the HAC and TCPC directly contacted with bone. Our results indicate that all three types of abraded and prefabricated cement have bonding strength to bone, but AWC has superior bone-bonding strength compared to HAC and TCPC.

Three types of bioactive bone cement (designated AWC, HAC, and TCPC), each consisting of bisphenol-alpha-glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA)-based resin and a bioactive filler of apatite and wollastonite containing glass-ceramic (AW-GC), sintered hydroxyapatite (HA), or beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP) powder were made in order to evaluate the influence of the bioactive filler on the mechanical and biological properties of bone cement. The proportion of filler added to the cements was 70% w/w. The compressive, bending, and tensile strengths and the fracture toughness of AWC were higher than HAC and TCPC under wet conditions. The cements were evaluated in vivo by packing them into the intramedullary canals of rat tibiae. An affinity index that equalled the length of bone in direct apposition to the cement was calculated for each cement and expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface. Histological examination of rat tibiae up to 8 weeks after implantation revealed that AWC had higher bioactivity than HAC and TCPC. New bone had formed along the AWC surface within 2 weeks, and at 4 weeks newly formed bone surrounded the cement surface almost completely. In HAC- and TCPC-implanted tibiae, immature bone had formed directly toward but not along the cement surface at 2 weeks. Observation of cement-bone interfaces showed that AWC had bonded to the bone via a so-called "Ca-P-rich layer"; the cement-bone interface remained stable, and the width of the CA-P-rich layer became thicker with time. On the other hand, in HAC- and TCPC-implanted tibiae, the cement surface fillers were surrounded by new bone and were absorbed gradually to become bone matrix. The cement-bone interfaces went inside the cement with time. Our results indicate that stronger interstitial bonding between the inorganic filler and the organic matrix resin in AWC lead to higher mechanical properties; results also indicate that the more stable cement-bone interface and higher bioactivity of AWC are due to early and uniform apatite formation on the cement surface.

We introduced an inhibitor to the polymerization reaction of bioactive bone cement (AWC) consisting of MgO-CaO-SiO2-P2O5-CaF2 apatite and wollastonite containing glass-ceramic powder and bisphenol-alpha-glycidyl methacrylate based resin, together with an increased amount of accelerator but without any prolongation of its setting time in order to improve the degree of polymerization and decrease the amount of incompletely polymerized monomers on the cement surface. A comparison was made between the AWC containing the inhibitor [AWC(I+)] and the AWC without it [AWC(I-)] with regard to setting parameters, mechanical properties, and surface reactivity in vitro and in vivo. The proportion of glass-ceramic powder added to the AWC was 70% (w/w). The total amount of heat generation and the peak temperature of the AWC(I+) during polymerization were slightly greater than those of the AWC(I-). The mechanical strength of AWC(I+) was higher than that of the AWC(I-) under wet conditions. In simulated body fluid, the width of the Ca-P rich layer on the surface of the AWC(I+) was less than that on the AWC(I-) after 28 days of immersion, although the rate of apatite formation on the top surface of the AWC(I+) was almost identical to that on the AWC(I-) surface. Histological examination using rat tibiae up to 26 weeks revealed that the bioactivity of the AWC(I+) was equivalent to that of the AWC(I-). Scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis demonstrated that the Ca-P rich layer in the AWC(I+) was significantly narrower than that in the AWC(I-) at the same time points. These results indicate that introduction of the inhibitor improved the mechanical properties of the AWC and made the Ca-P rich layer narrower, but it had no adverse effect on bioactivity.

Abstract:We took three types of bioactive bone cement (designated AWC, HAC, and TCPC), each with a different bioactive filler, and evaluated the influence of each filler on the mechanical properties and osteoconductivity of the cement. The cements consisted of bisphenol-a-glycidyl methacrylate-based (Bis-GMA based) monomers as an organic matrix, with a bioactive filler of apatite/wollastonite containing glass-ceramic (AW-GC) or sintered hydroxyapatite (HA) or ␤-tricalcium phosphate (␤-TCP) powder. Each filler was mixed with the monomers in proportions of 50, 70, and 80% (w/w), giving a total of nine cement subgroups. The nine subgroups were designated AWC50, AWC70, AWC80, HAC50, HAC70, HAC80, TCPC50, TCPC70, and TCPC80. The compressive and bending strengths of AWC were found to be higher than those of HAC and TCPC for all bioactive filler contents. We also evaluated the cements in vivo by packing them into the intramedullary canals of rat tibiae. To compare the osteoconductivity of the cements, an affinity index was calculated for each cement; it equaled the length of bone in direct apposition to the cement, expressed as a percentage of the total length of the cement surface. Microradiographic examination up to 26 weeks after implantation revealed that AWC showed a higher affinity index than HAC and TCPC for each filler content although the affinity indices of all nine subgroups (especially the AWC and HAC subgroups) increased with time. New bone had formed along the AWC surface within 4 weeks, even in the cement containing AW-GC filler at only 50% (w/w); observation of the cement-bone interfaces using a scanning electron microscope showed that all the cements had directly contacted the bone. At 4 weeks the AWC had bonded to the bone via a 10 m-thick reactive layer; the width of the layer, in which partly degraded AW-GC particles were seen, became slightly thicker with time. On the other hand, in the HACand TCPC-implanted tibiae, some particles on the cement surface were surrounded by new bone and partly absorbed or degraded. The results suggest that the stronger bonding between the inorganic filler and the organic matrix in the AWC cements gave them better mechanical properties. The results also indicate that the higher osteoconductivity of AWC was caused by the higher reactivity of the AW-GC powder on the cement surface.