Conclusions
MC-PMMA bone cement demonstrated good adaptive mechanical properties and biocompatibility and may be a promising alternative to commercial PMMA bone cements for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in clinical settings. While the present results for MC-PMMA bone cement are encouraging, further study of this cement is needed to explore its viability as an ideal alternative for use in PVP and BKP.
Methods
The in vitro properties of PMMA and MC-PMMA composite bone cement were determined, including setting time, compressive modulus, adherence, proliferation, and osteogenic differentiation of rat bone mesenchymal stem cells. The in vivo properties of both cements were evaluated in an animal study (36 osteoporotic New Zealand female rabbits divided equally between the two bone cement groups; PVP at L5) and a small-scale and short-term clinical study (12 patients in each of the two bone cement groups; follow-up: 2 years).
Results
In terms of value for PMMA bone cement, the handling properties of MC-PMMA bone cement were not significantly different. However, both compressive strength and compressive modulus were found to be significantly lower. In the rabbit model study, at 8 and 12 weeks post-surgery, bone regeneration was more significant in MC-PMMA bone cement (cortical bone thickness, osteoblast area, new bone area, and bone ingrowth %; each significantly higher). In the clinical study, at a follow-up of 2 years, both the Visual Analogue Score and Oswestry Disability Index were significantly reduced when MC-PMMA cement was used. Conclusions: MC-PMMA bone cement demonstrated good adaptive mechanical properties and biocompatibility and may be a promising alternative to commercial PMMA bone cements for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in clinical settings. While the present results for MC-PMMA bone cement are encouraging, further study of this cement is needed to explore its viability as an ideal alternative for use in PVP and BKP.