Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Research and Training Hospital, Çanakkale, Turkey.
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine Hospital, İzmir, Turkey.
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2020 Sep;54(5):535-540. doi: 10.5152/j.aott.2020.19086.
The objectives of this study were "1" to analyze the compressive and tensile mechanical strength characteristics of tigecycline loaded bone cement and "2" to compare them with those of vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements which are used in prosthetic joint infections complicated with resistant microorganisms.
In this study, three experimental groups, which consisted of vancomycin (subgroups containing 1 g, 2 g, and 3 g vancomycin), daptomycin (subgroups containing 0.5 g, 1 g, and 1.5 g daptomycin), and tigecycline (subgroups containing 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg tigecycline) and one control group without antibiotics were used. Using a standardized protocol, all antibiotic loaded bone cements were prepared. For each antibiotic group, including the control group, 10 samples were tested. All samples were biomechanically tested in terms of compressive strength and tensile strength.
Compression tests showed that all determined antibiotic concentrations resulted in a significant decrease when compared with the control group (p<0.0011). Vancomycin and daptomycin study groups demonstrated lower tensile strength than the control group (p<0.0011). However, comparison of tensile values of tigecycline study groups with the control group revealed no significant difference (p>0.0011). In addition, all statistically significant results from between groups comparisons revealed higher tensile and compressive mechanical strength values for the tigecycline groups (p<0.0011).
Evidence from this study has demonstrated that tigecycline loaded bone cement may have no mechanical disadvantage compared with vancomycin and daptomycin loaded bone cements in terms of mechanical strength when used at defined concentrations.
本研究的目的是“1”分析载替加环素骨水泥的抗压和拉伸机械强度特性,“2”并将其与用于治疗耐微生物制剂的人工关节感染的万古霉素和达托霉素载骨水泥进行比较。
在这项研究中,使用了三个实验组,分别为万古霉素(含 1 g、2 g 和 3 g 万古霉素的亚组)、达托霉素(含 0.5 g、1 g 和 1.5 g 达托霉素的亚组)和替加环素(含 50 mg、100 mg 和 150 mg 替加环素的亚组)以及一个不含抗生素的对照组。使用标准化方案制备所有抗生素载骨水泥。对于每个抗生素组,包括对照组,共测试了 10 个样本。所有样本均进行了抗压强度和拉伸强度的生物力学测试。
压缩试验表明,与对照组相比,所有测定的抗生素浓度均显著降低(p<0.0011)。万古霉素和达托霉素研究组的拉伸强度均低于对照组(p<0.0011)。然而,与对照组相比,替加环素研究组的拉伸值没有显著差异(p>0.0011)。此外,组间比较的所有统计学显著结果均表明替加环素组的拉伸和压缩机械强度值更高(p<0.0011)。
本研究表明,在定义的浓度下,替加环素载骨水泥在机械强度方面可能与万古霉素和达托霉素载骨水泥没有机械劣势。