title: Not all approved antibiotic-loaded PMMA bone cement brands are the same: ranking using the utility materials selection concept.
abstract: In the literature on in vitro characterization of approved antibiotic-loaded poly(methyl methacrylate) bone cement brands, there is no information on the basis for selection of a given brand for use in cemented arthroplasties. This shortcoming is addressed in the present study. It involved determining four key properties (fatigue limit, fracture toughness, polymerization rate, and phosphate buffered saline diffusion coefficient) for six brands and then using the mean property values, in conjunction with a materials selection methodology, called the utility concept, to rank the brands. It is emphasized that the present work is an illustration of a rational approach to selection of a cement brand and, as such, the study findings are not intended to be recommendations regarding clinical use or otherwise of a brand.
authors.affiliation: Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA, glewis@memphis.edu.
authors.forename: Gladius
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Lewis
mesh_terms: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000737:chemistry*; D001178:Arthroplasty / Q000379:methods*; D001843:Bone Cements / Q000737:chemistry*; D002152:Calorimetry, Differential Scanning; D017277:Drug Approval; D005839:Gentamicins / Q000008:administration & dosage; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D009985:Orthopedics / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D011108:Polymers / Q000737:chemistry; D019904:Polymethyl Methacrylate / Q000737:chemistry*; D011208:Powders; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013696:Temperature
chemical_list: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents; D001843:Bone Cements; D005839:Gentamicins; D011108:Polymers; D011208:Powders; D019904:Polymethyl Methacrylate