Interfacial properties of self-reinforced composite poly(methyl methacrylate)

Wright, Debra D.; Lautenschlager, Eugene P.; Gilbert, Jeremy L.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4636(199822)43:2<153::aid-jbm9>3.0.co;2-n

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In biomedical applications, self‐reinforced poly(methyl methacrylate) (SRC‐PMMA) has been investigated as a potential pre‐coat material for total hip replacements 2–9. Studies have shown that uni‐axial SRC‐PMMA has a significant increase in tensile strength, tensile modulus, fatigue strength, and tensile strain to failure 9.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rarity of antinuclear antibody negativity in systemic lupus erythematosus: Comment on the article by Merrill et al

Major¹

2011

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We read Drs. Villaseñor-Ovies and Canoso's comments with interest. They make an interesting argument for the important role of the nondominant hand in performing joint injection. However, their interpretation of our study and their subsequent hypothesis that we introduced a bias by restricting use of the nondominant hand is incorrect, as it is based on an erroneous assumption.The sham ultrasound was not performed by the same doctor who was performing the CE-guided injection, but rather was performed by a third party holding an ultrasound probe near the injection site. The system was turned off and the screen was not visible to the patient. As the patients had no previous experience of an ultrasound-guided injection, they would have been blinded with regard to the technique used.The CE-guided injectors were allowed to practice their normal injection technique without any restraint and with the full use of both hands. In fact, they may have had an advantage, rather than a disadvantage, over standard injection technique. For purposes of localizing the injectate on a plain radiograph, the joint was injected with a much larger volume (6 ml for the knee, 4 ml for all other joints) than is usual in rheumatology practice. In smaller joints, such as the wrist and ankle, this may have led to an increased likelihood of some of the injectate reaching the joint cavity, thus being one of the causes of our CE-guided injectors' having a better accuracy rate than those published in other studies (1,2).To establish how well the blinding had worked, patients were asked during followup to report which method of guidance they thought they had received. Of these patients, 13.8% were unsure as to how the injection was guided, 70% thought they had received an ultrasound-guided injection, and 16% thought they had received a CE-guided injection. The agreement by kappa statistic between the actual method of guiding the injection and the method the patient thought they had received was 0.19, indicating poor agreement and confirming that the strategy used to blind patients to the method of guidance was successful.Despite CE-guided injections being performed using the clinician's usual technique and using a large injectate volume, ultrasound-guided injection by a much less experienced rheumatologist (9 months of rheumatology experience) had an accuracy rate of 83%, while CE-guided injections by more experienced rheumatologists (9 consultants with a median of 15.0 years of rheumatology experience [range 9-33 years] and 9 specialist registrars with a median of 3.0 years of rheumatology experience [range 1-8 years]) had an accuracy rate of 66% (a statistically significant difference). Experienced ultrasonographers can obtain close to 100% accuracy with real-time guidance (3), while experienced clinicians can, at best, achieve 66% accuracy using the 2-hand clinically guided technique.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rarity of antinuclear antibody negativity in systemic lupus erythematosus: Comment on the article by Merrill et al

Major¹

2011

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SRC‐PMMA can be woven around a hip prosthesis, or other irregularly shaped object, and incorporated into a composite using hot compaction 25. This precoat has significantly enhanced mechanical properties over PMMA, and could hypothetically enhance the performance of the femoral component at the metal–bone cement interface.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pin‐on‐disc evaluation of self‐reinforced composite poly(methyl methacrylate) for total joint replacements

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Femoral components of hip replacements are commonly anchored in the femur with bone cement or poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA). Wear or fracture of bone cement can lead to loosening of the femoral component, which drastically affects the success and longevity of hip replacements. Self-reinforced composite PMMA (SRC-PMMA) has been previously developed for potential use, as a precoat material for hip replacements. The composite consists of high strength fibers that have been shown to have greatly improved mechanical properties over bulk PMMA. The goal of this work was to examine SRC-PMMA for improved wear properties, as a function of processing temperature. Pin-on-disc tests were used to characterize and rank the wear rates of SRC-PMMA and PMMA. Composites made with higher processing temperatures had significantly lower wear rates than do PMMA at a significance level of p < or = 0.05. The lowest wear rate was 8.2 microg/m, at a processing temperature of 136 degrees C, compared to a wear rate for PMMA of 13.3 microg/m. At the lowest processing temperature (105 degrees C), a wear rate higher than PMMA was found, and failure was dominated by fiber delamination. In the more completely processed samples (122 degrees C < or = T < or = 150 degrees C), wear rates were equivalent to or better than PMMA, and smoother and more homogenous wear was noted in wear tracks. Fatigue cracks were prominent at higher processing temperatures or when the wear pin was riding orthogonal to fibers. Wear particles were collected and examined. Wear particle diameter and aspect ratio showed no correlation to processing temperature, but were similar to particles retrieved from human tissue samples.

show abstract

“…Stellbrink et al [19] also studied the processing technique as applied to a liquid crystalline copolyester with the interesting result that the compacted LCP fibers exhibited high impact energy absorption, although the influence of compaction conditions on impact resistance was not clarified. Wright and coworkers [20,21] used hot compaction to prepare composites from poly(methyl methacrylate), PMMA, for biomedical applications, revealing substantial improvements in flexural, tensile, fracture toughness, and fatigue properties of compacted PMMA specimens compared to the virgin materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optically transparent self-reinforced poly(ethylene terephthalate) composites: molecular orientation and mechanical properties

Rojanapitayakorn

Mather

Goldberg

et al. 2005

Polymer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interfacial properties of self-reinforced composite poly(methyl methacrylate)

Cited by 16 publications

References 29 publications

The rarity of antinuclear antibody negativity in systemic lupus erythematosus: Comment on the article by Merrill et al

The rarity of antinuclear antibody negativity in systemic lupus erythematosus: Comment on the article by Merrill et al

Pin‐on‐disc evaluation of self‐reinforced composite poly(methyl methacrylate) for total joint replacements

Optically transparent self-reinforced poly(ethylene terephthalate) composites: molecular orientation and mechanical properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About