Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7829550

Materials testing protocol for small joint prostheses.

K M Savory·D T Hutchinson·R Bloebaum
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In this article, a protocol for the evaluation of new materials for small joint prostheses is introduced. The testing methods employed in the protocol were developed by reviewing reported clinical failure modes and conditions found in vivo. The methods developed quantitatively evaluates the fatigue, fatigue crack propagation, and wear resistance properties of materials. For this study, a silicone elastomer similar to Dow Corning Silastic HP100, a radiation stable polypropylene, and a copolymer of polypropylene and ethylene propylene-diene monomer (EPDM) are evaluated. None of the materials tested demonstrated the ideal properties that are sought in a self-hinging joint prostheses. The silicone elastomer had excellent wear properties; however, cracks quickly propagated, causing catastrophic failure when fatigued. Conversely, the copolymer showed excellent fatigue crack propagation resistance and less than favorable wear properties. The polypropylene did not perform well in any evaluation.

Explore related subjects

Biocompatible MaterialsGuidelines as TopicHumansJoint ProsthesisPolyethylenesPolypropylenesProsthesis FailureSilicone ElastomersStress, MechanicalSurface PropertiesComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K M Savory, D T Hutchinson, R Bloebaum. 1994. Materials testing protocol for small joint prostheses.. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820281011

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1996

Radiation dose perturbation at tissue-titanium dental interfaces in head and neck cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To determine the dose perturbation effects at the tissue-metal implant interfaces in head and neck cancer patients treated with 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Phantom measurements were performed to investigate the magnitude of dose perturbation to the tissue adjacent to the titanium alloy implants with (100 mu and 500 mu thick) and without hydroxylapatite (HA) coating. Radiographic and radiochromic films were placed at the upper (and lower) surface of circular metal discs (diameter x thickness: 15 x 3.2, 48 x 3.2, 48 x 3.8 mm2) in a solid water phantom and were exposed perpendicular to radiation beams. The dosimeters were scanned with automatic film scanners. Using a thin-window parallel-plate ion chamber, dose perturbation were measured for a 48 x 3.2 mm2 disc. RESULTS: At the upper surface of the tissue-dental implant interface, the radiographic data indicate that for 15 x 3.2 mm2 uncoated, as well as 100 mu coated discs, dose perturbation is about +22.5% and +20.0% using 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams, respectively. For 48 x 3.2 mm2 discs, these values basically remain the same. However, for 48 x 3.8 mm2 discs, these values increase slightly to about +23.0% and +20.5% for 6 MV and 10 MV beams, respectively. For 48 x 3.2 mm2 discs with 500 mu coating, dose enhancement is slightly lower than that obtained for uncoated and 100 mu coated discs for each beam energy studied. At the lower interface for 15 x 3.2 mm2 and 48 x 3.2 mm2 uncoated and 100 mu coated discs, dose reduction is similar and is about -13.5% and -9.5% for 6 MV and 10 MV beams, respectively. For 48 x 3.8 mm2 discs, dose reduction is about -14.5% and -10.0% for 6 MV and 10 MV beams, respectively. For 48 x 3.2 mm2 discs with 500 mu coating, the dose reduction were slightly higher than those for uncoated and 100 mu coated discs. CONCLUSIONS: For the beam energies studied, dose enhancement is slightly larger for the lower energy beam. The results of dose perturbation were similar for 100 mu coated and uncoated discs. These results were slightly lower for the 500 mu coated discs but are not clinically significant. The dosimetry results obtained from radiochromic films were similar to the ones obtained from radiographic film. The dose enhancement results obtained from ion chamber dosimetry are higher than those obtained from film dosimetry. The ion chamber data represent the data at "true" tissue-titanium interface, whereas the ones obtained from film dosimetry represent the data at film-titanium interface.

Biocompatible Materials↗
PubMed1996

Mechanisms of polymer degradation and erosion.

The most important features of the degradation and erosion of degradable polymers in vitro are discussed. Parameters of chemical degradation, which is the scission of the polymer backbone, are described such as the type of polymer bond, pH and copolymer composition. Examples are given how these parameters can be used to control degradation rates. Degradation leads finally to polymer erosion, the loss of material from the polymer bulk. The resulting changes in morphology, pH, oligomer and monomer properties as well as crystallinity are illustrated with selected examples. Finally, a brief survey on approaches to polymer degradation and erosion is given.

Biocompatible Materials↗
PubMed1996

Computer-aided design of bioerodible devices with optimal release characteristics: a cellular automata approach.

The development of a computational tool to design bioerodible devices with optimal release characteristics is presented. This computational tool uses cellular automata and parallel iterations to model and simulate the release of bioactive agents (drugs) from bioerodible matrices. The simulations can accurately model surface erosion processes in multicomponent systems of arbitrary geometry and with different dissolution rates for each component. Simulation results are analysed to show how the overall release rates are affected by the intrinsic dissolution rates, drug loading, porosity and the dispersion of the drug in the bioerodible matrix. A strongly non-linear dependence of release rates on drug loading and the intrinsic dissolution rates of the solid components is obtained and the effects of phase dispersion on the variability of release rates are elucidated. Finally, guidelines are presented for screening of alternatives to minimize the development effort and experimentation required for designing devices with desired release characteristics.

Biocompatible Materials↗