Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Comparative study of mechanical strength of compression between natural, synthetic and mixed biomaterials

ABSTRACT:

The orthopedic diseases with bone loss are the challenge in both veterinary and human medicine. Therefore, the orthopedist commonly deal with irreducible comminuted fractures of long bones, bone tumors or non-unions, which require repairers surgical procedures, through the segment replacement or bone defect filling with biomaterials. The aim of this research is to evaluate and compare the mechanical strength of natural, synthetic and mixed biomaterials. Seven experimental groups of six test samples each were used: Group 1 rabbit cortical bone (BONE - control); Group 2, bone cement (CO); Group 3, bone cement autoclaved (COA); Group 4, bone cement and dog cortical bone macrofragment (COMaFO); Group 5, bone cement and bone autoclaved macrofragment dog cortical (COMaFOA); Group 6, bone cement and dog cortical bone microfragment (COMIFO) and Group 7, bone cement and dog cortical bone microfragment (COMiFOA). The specimens were subjected to axial compression mechanical tests controlled universal testing machine EMIC®. The test was stopped when there was sharp decline in the graph curve indicating failure of the sample. In relation to the maximum force, the COA groups COMaFOA and COMiFOA not statistically different from the control group (BONE; p> 0.01). Already the CO groups, COMaFO and COMIFO difeririram statistically the control group (BONE; p <0.01). The relative rigidity, the COMaFOA and COMiFOA groups did not differ statistically from the control group (BONE; p>0.01). Already the CO groups, COA, COMaFO and COMIFO differed significantly from the control group (BONE; p<0.01). Comparing the deformation, the COMaFo groups COMaFOA and COMIFO not statistically different from the control group (BONE; p>0.01). Already the CO groups, COA and COMiFOA differed significantly from the control group (BONE; p<0.01). It is concluded that only COMaFOA and COMiFOA groups showed very similar mechanical properties to the control group (BONE). Therefore, due to these characteristics, these two biomaterials (COMaFOA e COMiFOA) would be the most suitable as a substitute in the repair of bone defects.

INDEX TERMS:
Strength; compression; biomaterial; natural; synthetic; mechanical tests; bone defect

Colégio Brasileiro de Patologia Animal - CBPA Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira, Caixa Postal 74.591, 23890-000 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 21) 2682-1081 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: pvb@pvb.com.br