Bone Ceme nt Ma tters Simplex P Bone Cemen ts The information contained in this document is intended for healthcare professionals only. Bone Cement Matters Simplex P Bone Cements

Bone Cement has been used in cemented arthroplasty for over 50 years. In that time, many bone cements have been used in orthopedics. Some have stood the test of time, while others have been phased out of use by surgeons. In that time, Simplex P has emerged as the most used bone cement in the US. 32 The surgeon’s decision to use one bone cement over another is multi-faceted. This piece discusses matters surgeons take into account in making this important choice for patient care.

Handling & Use One matter for consideration is intra- operative handling and ease of use. Surgeons have preferences towards handling properties, and it is important to understand the effect these properties may have on patient outcomes. How do the handling characteristics effect cement interdigitation and shear strength? What can be done to produce consistent setting times?

Safety Infection following total joint arthroplasty is a devastating complication that is very difficult to eradicate, once established. 26 bone cement allows localized delivery of the antibiotic at the cement-bone interface. 26 Which antibiotic is most effective against common joint arthroplasty bacteria? What are the elution profiles for different and cements?

Implant Survivorship The surgeon also studies the effect the bone cement will have on implant survivorship; a weak cement can cause a component to loosen. What role, for better or worse, do certain ingredients in the cement formula play? How does cement contribute to polyethylene wear and osteolysis?

All matters considered, surgeons must always rely on their clinical judgment when deciding which bone cement to use. Bone cement is an implant, and as you will read, Simplex Bone Cements demonstrate excellent survivorship. 33 Surgeons choose Simplex P over other bone cements… because Bone Cement Matters.

1 H a

Viscosity Ma tters n d l i Why Viscosity is Important n g &

What is viscosity? Figure 1: Longitudinal U s

sections of the cement e Viscosity describes the cement’s resistance to flow. Cement is mantle for the different classified by which state it remains in the longest. Typically a types of cements. There low (LV) or high (HV) viscosity cement stays for a long time are pores at the cement- ® in one state. For instance, a LV cement ( DePuy 3) spends stem interface. more of its working time in a low viscosity state. Therefore, if a high viscosity state is desired, the working time may be too short for the application time needed. On the other hand, HV cements (Palacos ®, SmartSet HV) are thick or “doughy” immediately after mixing, and can only be used in that high viscosity state. How can Simplex be used in a high viscosity state? What viscosity is Simplex? Here are some tips for accelerating Simplex’s high viscosity state: For many years Simplex P Bone Cement has been referred 1) Store Simplex at the higher end of the recommended to as both a low and high viscosity cement in the literature. storage temperature range of 43-74° F. Thus in recent years, Simplex came to be known as “medium 2) Consider using the Stryker Revolution Mixing System. viscosity” to be able to classify the dual phases in which The Revolution system uses a power reamer to mix the Simplex can be used. If delivered very early after mixing cement. Cement setting times with this power mixing and/or if the cement storage and ambient temperature are system have demonstrated quicker dough and setting cold, Simplex P can be used in a low or medium viscosity state. times than with other Stryker cement mixers. 22 If the cement is delivered a few minutes after mixing and/or 3) Follow the appropriate mixing instructions for the cement the storage temperature and ambient temperature are warm, mixer used, and mix for slightly longer if desired. Mixing the cement can be used in a high viscosity state. longer should speed up the chemical reaction as well as dough and setting times. 4) If the O.R. temperature is very cold, consider waiting to Why is viscosity important? bring Simplex into the cold O.R. environment until immediately before cement mixing will begin. The Surgeons who prefer HV cement like its handling characteris - longer the bone cement is in a cold environment the tics, especially when finger-packing cement for applica - more it may affect the setting time. tions. Viscosity affects not only how easy it is for the surgeon 5) Time your mixing to the state of viscosity required. If the to handle, but also how thoroughly it penetrates the pores of goal is a high viscosity cement, begin mixing earlier to cancellous bone to achieve fixation. eliminate any waiting time. Do several test mixing sessions The deeper cement penetrates into bone, the stronger the to learn what timing preference is right for various fixation and shear strength of the bond. 17 HV cements cannot surgical situations. be pressurized into bone as well as medium viscosity cements. In Summary: Simplex achieves approximately 75% deeper intrusion compared to high viscosity Palacos ®.17 • Simplex P Bone Cement, a dual phase cement, affords surgeons the choice of viscosity that is desired, all in one product. • Used in a medium viscosity state, Simplex achieves 2.4mm 4.2mm approximately 75% deeper intrusion compared to high viscosity Palacos ®.17 • There are techniques to accelerate the high viscosity state Palacos ® Simplex P of Simplex, but be aware of the concerns about high viscosity cements including poor pressurization and Porosity is air entrapped in bone cement, which can lead to the presence of laminations. 8, 10, 14, 18-21 mechanical failure. 14 Reduction in porosity increases fatigue strength. 14 Palacos ®, because of its high viscosity, may be CementTip difficult to remove air from, even with vacuum mixing. 8, 14,18-21 DePuy ® manufactures a family of bone cement Also, if a surgeon waits too long to apply a high viscosity products, including some new cements with limited cement, laminations or folds can occur in the cement mantle. clinical history. By understanding the dual phases 10 of Simplex, coupled with its excellent survivorship, A lamination could reduce cement strength. surgeons can use Simplex no matter what their preference .

2 e

s Consistency Matters U

& Controlling Setting Factors g n i l d n a

H In Summary: • There are many factors that influence bone cement setting time. • Dr. Schurman has had success with isolating one of the variables: storage temperature. • By storing the liquid, powder, mixer, and mixing instruments at 73°, Dr. Schurman has seen consistent 10 minute setting times using SpeedSet .

CementTip Compare set times related to OR temperature and mixing system with the Bone Cement Set Time Chart (LBCT-S).

What influences bone cement setting time? Many factors including storage temperature, O.R. temperature, humidity, mixing conditions, mixing speed and handling of the cement influence setting time. 27 Operating room environments can vary widely affecting these conditions. This can all add up to a very unpredictable set time and working time in an otherwise very controlled surgical technique. Controlling the variables can limit complications and may lead to more reproducible results.

What can the surgeon do? Dr. John R. Schurman of Wichita, Kansas has been able to neutralize the variability of working time and setting time of the cement by using the Simplex P SpeedSet product and controlling the cement environment. This has enabled him to reproduce working time and set time. The temperature of the cement powder, monomer, bowl and mixing instruments are controlled at 73° F in a water bath at the time of setup of the case. When mixing is started, the mixing tools and cement ingredients are retrieved and mixing is done for 1 minute at 1 revolution mixing speed. The mixed –liquid cement is then set aside and, in this surgeon’s experience, set time is consistently 10 minutes. This uniform process allows Dr. Schurman to plan the mixing of cement in the procedure to eliminate waiting for the cement to dough. Operating room environmental variables no longer affect the cementing process for Dr. Schurman.

3 Antibiotic Selection Matters Tobramycin vs. Gentamicin Bone Cements

Why Use Pre-blended Antibiotic Bone Cement? What are the elution characteristics of Simplex with Tobramycin? Today, orthopedic companies offer bone cement pre-blended with antibiotics. Some hospitals choose to hand-blend Tobramycin also elutes better than gentamicin from bone antibiotics intra-operatively (off label). Commercially- cement. 29 Palacos’s ® higher porosity contributes to its good blended antibiotic cement demonstrated an approximate elution profile, however porosity may have a deleterious 50% increase in strength compared to hand-blended effect on the mechanics and long-term durability of the antibiotic cement. 24 reconstruction. 28 Furthermore, Palacos ® R+G contains .5g active gentamicin, compared to 1g of active antibiotic in Simplex with Tobramycin. The resulting elution S

characteristics can be seen in Figure 4. 29 a f e t Figure 4: y Elution Characteristics: Tobramycin vs. Gentamicin 31

Palacos ® R with Gentamicin

Figure 2: Simplex ™ P with Tobramycin 24

Simplex ™ P with Tobramycin

Are there any concerns about using vancomycin prophylactically? Surgeons who add gentamicin and vancomycin to cement to increase the antibiotic effectiveness need to be aware of the Figure 3: Hand Blended Antibiotic 24 dangers of vancomycin-resistant bacteria strains, according Why use tobramycin over gentamicin? to AAOS. 31 Tobramycin is the antibiotic of choice for 75% of U.S. AAOS Recommendation: Vancomycin should be reserved for orthopedic surgeons. 25 Tobramycin and gentamicin are both the treatment of serious infection with beta-lactam-resistant aminoglycosides. However, tobramycin has the added benefit organisms or for treatment of infection in patients with of superior activity against Pseudomonas. 26 In fact, one study life-threatening allergy to beta-lactam antimicrobials. 31 demonstrated that 93% of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria isolates tested were susceptible to tobramycin, while only 81% were susceptible to gentamicin. 27 Another study, using a Kirby-Bauer susceptibility model, showed in vitro activity of Simplex with 1 gram of tobramycin against 99 strains of common orthopedic organisms. • 24 strains of Staphylococcus were studied. None of the 24 strains were found to be resistant to tobramycin. 26 • Enterococcus faecalis, MRSA, MRSE, and slime producing Staph epidermis showed limited susceptibility Simplex P with Tobramycin Bone Cement is indicated for to the concentrations of antibiotic released from the the fixation of prostheses to living bone in the second bone cement discs containing tobramycin. 33 stage of a two-stage revision for total joint arthroplasty. • The inhibition of even the most virulent strains at the surface of the bone cement disc containing antibiotics was significant. 33 4 Third Body Wear Ma tters Barium sulfate vs. Zirconium dioxide

What Is Third-Body Wear? “The presence of macrophages at the bone-PMMA interface is a tissue reaction which no implant Third-body wear occurs when abrasive particles become surgeon can lightly dismiss. ” 34 entrapped between primary bearing surfaces. These particles - Sir John Charnley may include fragments of bone cement, polyethylene, or metallic particulates. What Does Barium Sulfate/Zirconium Dioxide Do? Granules of radiopaque agents can separate from the cement. [Fig 5]. This results in damage to the metal articulating surface Barium sulfate and zirconium dioxide are radiopaque and, as a consequence, a marked increase in polyethylene wear .4 additives in bone cements that make the cement visible on X-rays. Figure 5: Number of scratches per mm of the wear track ± 95% confidence limits. 3 How Does Barium Sulfate Differ From Bone cement A: Bone cement without additive Zirconium Dioxide? Bone cement B: Bone cement with barium sulfate Zirconium dioxide, found in Palacos ®, is grainier and shows Bone cement C: Bone cement with zirconium dioxide evidence of agglomeration, or clumping. 2 It has also been proven to cause more third-body wear to an implant than barium sulfate, found in Simplex. 1 p i In Simplex P, barium sulfate is blended under special h s

r controls to allow for uniform barium sulfate dispersion o

v that is free of clumps, even under 2000x magnification. i v r u S t n a l p What Can Third-Body Wear Lead To? m I Macrophages (“big eaters”) in the body digest cellular debris. As the macrophages engulf the granules , a reaction occurs causing the macrophages to behave differently – they begin to act as osteoclasts and resorb bone, causing osteolysis .5 Figure 6: Radiopaque agents used in manufacturer’s bone cement.

Figure 6: Simplex P Powder Mixture 36 Zirconium Barium Even though DePuy ® SmartSet MV contains barium sulfate, dioxide sulfate note the clumps of the material in the mixture. Simplex • Palacos ® • Osteobond • Cobalt • Versabond • DePuy ® 1/2/3 SmartSet MV • SmartSet HV • In Summary: • Barium sulfate and zirconium dioxide are added to cement by manufacturers to make them radiopaque, or visible on X-rays. clump of barium sulfate • Zirconium dioxide, found in Palacos ® and other cements, has been proven to clump and cause more third-body wear to an implant than barium sulfate. 1,2

Figure 7: DePu y® SmartSet MV Powder Mixture 36

5 Implant Survivorship 6 . e k s e t e n o f o e s a e s i l n a . n e c d n d e s a t t s g a 0 1 b - h t e s e l s e m o s r h t t e r l a h e h h t c u wh m s t n e s e t i p s i u t s o m a n e i t u t n e e n o x n e m r o t a t n e o l b f b s ’ P e t s u o c u e m e h s r m y ts men y M E h t i m x o tr n o 5 3 c m e c p e m c c S u o n e i s n n a h t i o v e ll a . o t n t n i . ry ty i n e o e l p t n e i t g n gd i g o o c t v t n e d n r e a h t u s e u r a m j t a p t o i b m t n u i vi Ce a o m g n s h W t a s o c u s i S o w o r a e s . e m e c o m e c o t i h n y o c e h l a c h t g n e r r o f t e s v r e t n a s e s g a e tr s t s A n e m r e n u s t n e m e e r a e t s e w o i n i g n ti s o h t s i u . s d e m i h C pe l c u q gi h bo s r o f o t b e l i n t n e e t t i u o , r h t tra i t s i n r c n e r e f f s y r o p n t o i a o tr s t e n n i c b a M E d n e l u n s l r u o 3 i d n , s h c osity S e M b w o ri y s n o m e c s a e e t a t o o B e i t h o c h . r a t a e t d s t n e a v n e m e y l h t d e t g r e P y m ra m e c n o i p s t 1 h t l a s n r e t t a m e w d i n a c i o n n i n e y g r ® t n e e r G l n o o f i h m o x e m e c i a l t c r x i e s b o T n e m 7 1 u s e n m e r e n o e t n e e m o r e r 2 1 h Visc e s r m . P i y u P b l a e l p x m e s e c gi n e c t t s a h m e c e p g u s i s d n a . ll x ’ h C h y a i t y h n o 4 2 e e D c l p m i S w t i ti a p e t i e n t e l e n y e r e r g n r n a h a e h w s n . x o r w l e x o 4 i h t t a c m o c i r i t e y 3 f l a b o r t e n . b m u h u h o e l f s w p m o e u h t n s a P f r m d n a i c c o r s g t s e s e o pe f o ® s l o p i S w o e d s B e s o e g n p m x e x e h h r u e c a t i m i t n o r b o r b s e u h c e c s e r u s a s a y u m Hig i S o c d y l p l p rf S t o i u i d n i o s i s i ll ll u n t x u a c . u e t e m e t m m d u h e k i i ra b S e w e w o N i m i l e t s e c C Be h T r D n a m h T o Y h W n i c e d a l a P S i m w o h s e l b i l h , Than c 4 1 s t , r e h A e e s s e r o y t nt u m t i t a h t e l gi h nc s f e r the ine d jo o me uc ed . r e v o n e m e c e p e he e r a r be e c i s o r o p T is umps. eilitttab w y e c n a c i f i gn i s wh t i , 1 9 8 e r c d n a uc d e l c ® g , n i t f ng . e c n a r m o rf , s c i t s a l p y Less y ma e n o B e r l a c m e l b o r p ak s®. o s s t n s e c u fo r ni ed r e v eli time pe i h s h ® s o l a o t d r e ng lo d e u P e g . n ic 6 r d-fl e i n i l c . ee r e eas ncr o mai f ® s i e h t o D x b o alac ea n e m e C king wh e r s a t n e n P c a l a P ps e l o b . y nificantl g n i o c , o t t l a c i n a h h e, r ot e mind n e . e e n d n a i n e s o o c e t n a l p m i sig can h ro w a l a r a l th n ® p m i x i m i a h 6 u xt gr l i T P m t . e p than S ld it ned r e y la ee s . s r o p m o c ng a d n e d n il s o c ? the x. mi i 1 1 , 7 ty r m e u a nts . r o m u a m i s t m i t e s i t n e m e c l esig s e l ee cr o t , . e at n ad mi o h , shou o T a h t d d u c unt Cr pi o a P n th - g n s m o d a n o ti eous i n io a ase s m i t nt a V r e v o y l t n o l ne K 0 0 5 e l osi pr o d a r e t s r e n o b e ur o i t a x . y n o i t a ? p e o t , c i e e k i l e cr nat . r e v s. me a f i f n e g t a t i r o at , nt me e these e fo o L 6 v o in c ex l a r e w p e s o mi e C y a m 6 ty rc l y ed oc c is p e e r c i o a n ro a m f e r o e d o r e tn io rm o f r l a c i f gi n l a rs atte M e r 10 r o so gh d x imple S l p e c n o i t a e r C p indic . x e vi o i s i s . e r u l p mo ho pl a h c u m ep e k l i n a a u e d f s o c p s t n th. t n a s n a o a h c ? p e ha d y l i d i a f s i time o r e a h c ids: s s p h c u m s t n x a l e e e mina the s e n e i s p e v p m e r C e e m ul s e b t a x a l : ry R at e c i la e x e a e t r c o v n o e r i S ng e r e m in s tho e m e c o o ic nt me e r t n c d n a e r C f ho r c t pl , y . 1 st e iti e t ep i t s a l p m e c l a c s , a e t n e o t s u a n a o d n a ® e c e c fo ® c , y l n a t Sim s e nd s s ed i ou d r im thl C C I e g n r o n o m e : 0 1 ty a m m p S

h t y u in us i c i s y h ro ing k w r e P e c u p e e r b ns o s m w o l o c a r t n a t mina c p d d mpos s e p t a t a t a n me x e l p m P e s e ll n o b d e ds e ur ns li l a u S i i n e s eg t

o g r e d r e t , p e e l e e e nc ese i s D A S P seam e c smoo E R an o c E not th an e n o i o r ur t s a a h t n i o o l n u s o r po n a c B h W l A • • r C p e r • V h W s f h W e h T e r u g i F r C • • n I

• e Cr References: 1. Fisher, J., Ingham, E., Stone, M. Comparison of Wear and Damage Caused by Bone Cements with Barium Sulfate and Zirconium Dioxide Radiopaque Additives, Effort , O 586. 2. Harper, E.J., Bonfield, W. Tensile Characteristics of Ten Commercial Acrylic Bone Cements. Jour Biomed Mat Res. 53 (5): 605-616. 3. Minakawa, H., Stone, M., Wroblewski, B.M., Porter, M., Ingham, E., Fisher, J. Comparison of 3rd Body damage on the Femoral Head Caused by Bone and Bone Cement. 44th Annual Meeting, Orthopaedic Research Society, March 16-19, 1998, New Orleans, Louisiana. 4. Caravia, L., Dowson, D., Fisher, J., Jobbins, B. The influence of bone and bone cement debris on counterface roughness in sliding wear tests of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene on stainless steel. Proc Inst Mech Engin. 1990 Vol. 204 No H1. 65-70. 5. Pandey, R., Quinn, J., Joyner, C., Murray, D.W., Triffitt, J.T., Athanasou, N.A. Arthroplasty implant particle associated macrophages differentiate into lacunar bone resorbing cells. Annals of Rheumatic Diseases. v. 55(6); Jun 1996. 388-395. 6. Holm N. The relaxation of some acrylic bone cements. Acta Orthop Scand. 1980; 51: 727-731. 7. Eveleigh R. Mixing systems and the effect of vacuum mixing on bone cements. Br J Perioper Nurs. 2001 Mar; 11(3) : 132, 135-40. 8. Jasty M, Davies J, Daniel O, O’Connor SB, Burke D, Harrigan T, Harris W. Porosity of Various Preparations of Acrylic Bone Cements. J Clin Orth Rel Res. #259 October 1990: 122-129. 9. Lee AJC, Perkins RD, Ling RSM. Time-dependent properties of polymethylmethacrylate bone cement. Implant Bone Interface. Springer-Verlag Publishers. 1990. 10. Oh I, Bourne RB, Harris WH. The femoral cement compactor. J Bone Joint Surg. 1983; 65: 1335-1338. 11. Walenkamp GHIM, Murray DW. Effect of PMMA Creep and Prosthesis Surface Finish on the Behavior of a Tapered Cemented Total Hip Stem. Bone Cements and Cementing Technique. Springer Publishers. 2001. 12. K. Iesaka, MD, W. L. Jaffe, MD, C. M. Jones, MD, and F. J. Kummer, PhD. The effects of fluid penetration and interfacial porosity on the fixation of cemented femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Vol. 87-B, Issue 9. 1298-1302. 13. From “Palacos ® Bone Cement” brochure. Zimmer® Orthopaedic Surgical Products, Inc. 2005. 97-1112-001-00. 14. Linden U. Fatigue properties of bone cement: Comparison of Mixing Techniques. Acta Orthop Scand. 1989: 60(4): 431-433. 15. Davies JP, Jasty M, O-Connor DO, Burke DW, Harrigan TP, Harris WH. The effect of centrifuging bone cement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1989; 71-B:39-42. 16. Palacos ® R Instructions for use 03/2005. 17. Rey R, Paiement G, McGann W, et al. A study of intrusion characteristics of low viscosity cement Simplex P and Palacos ® cement in a bovine cancellous bone model. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1987; 215: 272-278. 18. Shurman D, Swenson L, Piziali R. Bone Cement with and without Antibiotics: A Study of Mechanical Properties. The Otto E. Aufranc Award Paper, Chapter 4. 1978. 19. MacDonald W, Phil M, Swarts E, Beaver R. Penetration and Shear Strength of Cement-Bone Interfaces in Vivo. Clin Orth Rel Res. Number 286, Jan. 1993. 20. Harper EJ, Bonfield W. Tensile Characteristics of Ten Commercial Acrylic Bone Cements. Jour Biomed Mat Res. Vol. 53, Iss 5, p. 605-616. 21. Hansen D, Jensen J. Additional Mechanial Tests of Bone Cements. Acta Orthop Belg. Vol. 58 (3) 1992. 22. Stryker Technical Report RD-06010. 23. Instructions For Use. Simplex P. Stryker Orthopaedics. 0700-4-142. 2003/04. 24. DeLuise M, Scott C. Addition of hand-blended generic tobramycin in bone cement: effect on mechanical strength. Orthopedics. Dec 2004, Vol. 27 (12): 1289-1291. 25. Fish DN, Hoffman HM, Danziger LH. Antibiotic-impregnated cement use in US hospitals. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992;49:2469-2474. 26. Scott CP, Higham PA, Dumbleton JH. Effectiveness of bone cement containing tobramycin. An vitro susceptibility study of 99 organisms found in infected joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 May; 81(3):440-443. 27. BAC-DATA, The Bacteriological Report, Vol. 1 (Dec 1986-Feb 1987). 28. Duncan C, Masri B. The role of antibiotic-loaded cement in the treatment of an infection after a . JBJS, Vol. 76-A, No 11, Nov 1994. 29. Nelson CL, Griggin FM, Harrison BH, Cooper RE. In vitro elution characteristics of commercially and noncommercially prepared antibiotic PMMA beads. Clin Orthop. 1992 Nov (284): 303-9. 1992 30. Tech Report RD-01-045. Stryker Orthopedics. 31. http://www.aaos.org/about/papers/advistmt/1016.asp. 32. Global markets for bone cement and accessories 2008. Millennium Research Group. October 2007. 33. Havelin LI, Espenhaug B, Vollset Se, Engesaeter LB. The effect of the type of cement on the early revision of Charnley total hip prostheses. J Bone J Surg. 1995: 1543-1550. 325 Corporate Drive 34. Charnley J. Low friction arthroplasty of the hip. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1979: 34. Mahwah, NJ 07430 35. US News & World Report. America’s Best Hospitals. July 23-30, 2007. 36. Stryker Technical Report RD-08-025. t: 201 831 5000 www.stryker.com

A surgeon must always rely on his or her own professional clinical judgment when deciding to use which products and/or techniques on individual patients. Stryker is not dispensing medical advice and recommends that surgeons be trained in orthopaedic before performing any surgeries. The information presented is intended to demonstrate the breadth of Stryker product offerings. Always refer to the package insert, product label and/or user instructions before using any Stryker product. Products may not be available in all markets. Product availability is subject to the regulatory or medical practices that govern individual markets. Please contact your Stryker representative if you have questions about the availability of Stryker products in your area. Stryker Corporation or its divisions or other corporate affiliated entities own, use or have applied for the following trademarks or service marks: Simplex, SpeedSet and Stryker. All other trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners or holders. Literature Number: LSPBC-CB MS/GS 4C 07/08 Copyright © 2008 Stryker Printed in USA