Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments
The idea of being able to glue bone fragments with a suitable biocompatible adhesive remains highly attractive to orthopaedic surgeons. Yet despite decades of research, no suitable system that fully meets all the many requirements for such an adhesive has yet been identified. This article reviews th...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of adhesion and adhesives 2012-03, Vol.33, p.89-97 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 97 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 89 |
container_title | International journal of adhesion and adhesives |
container_volume | 33 |
creator | Farrar, David F. |
description | The idea of being able to glue bone fragments with a suitable biocompatible adhesive remains highly attractive to orthopaedic surgeons. Yet despite decades of research, no suitable system that fully meets all the many requirements for such an adhesive has yet been identified. This article reviews the requirements and challenges of developing a bone adhesive for fracture repair and also the substantial progress that has been made. Developments in bone adhesives can roughly be classified into two groups: synthetic and biologically-derived/inspired. Early examples of synthetic adhesives include poly(methyl methacrylate) and related polymers, cyanoacrylates and polyurethanes. These materials are characterised by relatively good mechanical properties but often lack the required biocompatibility and biodegradability. More recent adhesive systems based on lactide–methacrylate chemistry therefore attempt to address these issues. Similarly, there is renewed interest in glass ionomer cements and calcium/magnesium phosphate cements. Biological adhesives include fibrin and gelatin-based systems. These have good biocompatibility and biodegradability but lack the cohesive strength to have good adhesion to bone and are used chiefly in soft tissue applications. Newer examples that are looking more promising include adhesives inspired by mussel adhesive proteins and the “sandcastle glue” of the marine worm
Phragmatopoma californica. As well as the challenge to develop the adhesive systems themselves a further need is for greater consistency in the testing of adhesion to bone both
in vitro/ex vivo and
in vivo. Test methods in the literature are reviewed together with considerations for the design of such tests. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.009 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1010893170</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0143749611001655</els_id><sourcerecordid>1010893170</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-87825b85a6c90021f039093498180137dbcf566410a35e7717450af0403d59de3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwC8gbJDYJ4zixY1aUiqcqsYG15TqT1lGaFDst6t_jqsAW6UqzOXdGcwi5ZJAyYOKmSV1jqmVMmgFjaQyAOiIjVkqVAMvkMRkBy3kicyVOyVkIDQCTkPMReb3vO6Sxi8FtMdC693TwZrMyNGz8Av3ulk6ox63DL9rX1C5N22K3iKjpKlrhFtt-vcJuCOfkpDZtwIufOSYfjw_v0-dk9vb0Mp3MEstlMSSlLLNiXhZGWAWQsRq4AsVzVbISGJfV3NaFEDkDwwuUksm8AFNDDrwqVIV8TK4Pe9e-_9xgGPTKBYttazrsN0FHKVAqHh-MqDig1vcheKz12ruV8bsI7TmhG_0rT-_l6ZgoLxavfm6YYE1be9NZF_7aWSFYzqSI3N2Bw_hwdOR1sA47i5XzaAdd9e6_U9_Ae4ZS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1010893170</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Farrar, David F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Farrar, David F.</creatorcontrib><description>The idea of being able to glue bone fragments with a suitable biocompatible adhesive remains highly attractive to orthopaedic surgeons. Yet despite decades of research, no suitable system that fully meets all the many requirements for such an adhesive has yet been identified. This article reviews the requirements and challenges of developing a bone adhesive for fracture repair and also the substantial progress that has been made. Developments in bone adhesives can roughly be classified into two groups: synthetic and biologically-derived/inspired. Early examples of synthetic adhesives include poly(methyl methacrylate) and related polymers, cyanoacrylates and polyurethanes. These materials are characterised by relatively good mechanical properties but often lack the required biocompatibility and biodegradability. More recent adhesive systems based on lactide–methacrylate chemistry therefore attempt to address these issues. Similarly, there is renewed interest in glass ionomer cements and calcium/magnesium phosphate cements. Biological adhesives include fibrin and gelatin-based systems. These have good biocompatibility and biodegradability but lack the cohesive strength to have good adhesion to bone and are used chiefly in soft tissue applications. Newer examples that are looking more promising include adhesives inspired by mussel adhesive proteins and the “sandcastle glue” of the marine worm
Phragmatopoma californica. As well as the challenge to develop the adhesive systems themselves a further need is for greater consistency in the testing of adhesion to bone both
in vitro/ex vivo and
in vivo. Test methods in the literature are reviewed together with considerations for the design of such tests.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0143-7496</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0127</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.009</identifier><identifier>CODEN: IJAADK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adhesion ; Adhesion in surgery and medicine ; Adhesion tests ; Adhesives ; Applied sciences ; Biocompatibility ; Biodegradability ; Biological adhesion ; Bone adhesives ; Bones ; Design engineering ; Exact sciences and technology ; Glues ; Novel adhesives ; Physicochemistry of polymers ; Polymer industry, paints, wood ; Technology of polymers</subject><ispartof>International journal of adhesion and adhesives, 2012-03, Vol.33, p.89-97</ispartof><rights>2011 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2014 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-87825b85a6c90021f039093498180137dbcf566410a35e7717450af0403d59de3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-87825b85a6c90021f039093498180137dbcf566410a35e7717450af0403d59de3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25614176$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Farrar, David F.</creatorcontrib><title>Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments</title><title>International journal of adhesion and adhesives</title><description>The idea of being able to glue bone fragments with a suitable biocompatible adhesive remains highly attractive to orthopaedic surgeons. Yet despite decades of research, no suitable system that fully meets all the many requirements for such an adhesive has yet been identified. This article reviews the requirements and challenges of developing a bone adhesive for fracture repair and also the substantial progress that has been made. Developments in bone adhesives can roughly be classified into two groups: synthetic and biologically-derived/inspired. Early examples of synthetic adhesives include poly(methyl methacrylate) and related polymers, cyanoacrylates and polyurethanes. These materials are characterised by relatively good mechanical properties but often lack the required biocompatibility and biodegradability. More recent adhesive systems based on lactide–methacrylate chemistry therefore attempt to address these issues. Similarly, there is renewed interest in glass ionomer cements and calcium/magnesium phosphate cements. Biological adhesives include fibrin and gelatin-based systems. These have good biocompatibility and biodegradability but lack the cohesive strength to have good adhesion to bone and are used chiefly in soft tissue applications. Newer examples that are looking more promising include adhesives inspired by mussel adhesive proteins and the “sandcastle glue” of the marine worm
Phragmatopoma californica. As well as the challenge to develop the adhesive systems themselves a further need is for greater consistency in the testing of adhesion to bone both
in vitro/ex vivo and
in vivo. Test methods in the literature are reviewed together with considerations for the design of such tests.</description><subject>Adhesion</subject><subject>Adhesion in surgery and medicine</subject><subject>Adhesion tests</subject><subject>Adhesives</subject><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Biocompatibility</subject><subject>Biodegradability</subject><subject>Biological adhesion</subject><subject>Bone adhesives</subject><subject>Bones</subject><subject>Design engineering</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Glues</subject><subject>Novel adhesives</subject><subject>Physicochemistry of polymers</subject><subject>Polymer industry, paints, wood</subject><subject>Technology of polymers</subject><issn>0143-7496</issn><issn>1879-0127</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwC8gbJDYJ4zixY1aUiqcqsYG15TqT1lGaFDst6t_jqsAW6UqzOXdGcwi5ZJAyYOKmSV1jqmVMmgFjaQyAOiIjVkqVAMvkMRkBy3kicyVOyVkIDQCTkPMReb3vO6Sxi8FtMdC693TwZrMyNGz8Av3ulk6ox63DL9rX1C5N22K3iKjpKlrhFtt-vcJuCOfkpDZtwIufOSYfjw_v0-dk9vb0Mp3MEstlMSSlLLNiXhZGWAWQsRq4AsVzVbISGJfV3NaFEDkDwwuUksm8AFNDDrwqVIV8TK4Pe9e-_9xgGPTKBYttazrsN0FHKVAqHh-MqDig1vcheKz12ruV8bsI7TmhG_0rT-_l6ZgoLxavfm6YYE1be9NZF_7aWSFYzqSI3N2Bw_hwdOR1sA47i5XzaAdd9e6_U9_Ae4ZS</recordid><startdate>20120301</startdate><enddate>20120301</enddate><creator>Farrar, David F.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120301</creationdate><title>Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments</title><author>Farrar, David F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-87825b85a6c90021f039093498180137dbcf566410a35e7717450af0403d59de3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adhesion</topic><topic>Adhesion in surgery and medicine</topic><topic>Adhesion tests</topic><topic>Adhesives</topic><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Biocompatibility</topic><topic>Biodegradability</topic><topic>Biological adhesion</topic><topic>Bone adhesives</topic><topic>Bones</topic><topic>Design engineering</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Glues</topic><topic>Novel adhesives</topic><topic>Physicochemistry of polymers</topic><topic>Polymer industry, paints, wood</topic><topic>Technology of polymers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Farrar, David F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>International journal of adhesion and adhesives</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Farrar, David F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments</atitle><jtitle>International journal of adhesion and adhesives</jtitle><date>2012-03-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>33</volume><spage>89</spage><epage>97</epage><pages>89-97</pages><issn>0143-7496</issn><eissn>1879-0127</eissn><coden>IJAADK</coden><abstract>The idea of being able to glue bone fragments with a suitable biocompatible adhesive remains highly attractive to orthopaedic surgeons. Yet despite decades of research, no suitable system that fully meets all the many requirements for such an adhesive has yet been identified. This article reviews the requirements and challenges of developing a bone adhesive for fracture repair and also the substantial progress that has been made. Developments in bone adhesives can roughly be classified into two groups: synthetic and biologically-derived/inspired. Early examples of synthetic adhesives include poly(methyl methacrylate) and related polymers, cyanoacrylates and polyurethanes. These materials are characterised by relatively good mechanical properties but often lack the required biocompatibility and biodegradability. More recent adhesive systems based on lactide–methacrylate chemistry therefore attempt to address these issues. Similarly, there is renewed interest in glass ionomer cements and calcium/magnesium phosphate cements. Biological adhesives include fibrin and gelatin-based systems. These have good biocompatibility and biodegradability but lack the cohesive strength to have good adhesion to bone and are used chiefly in soft tissue applications. Newer examples that are looking more promising include adhesives inspired by mussel adhesive proteins and the “sandcastle glue” of the marine worm
Phragmatopoma californica. As well as the challenge to develop the adhesive systems themselves a further need is for greater consistency in the testing of adhesion to bone both
in vitro/ex vivo and
in vivo. Test methods in the literature are reviewed together with considerations for the design of such tests.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.009</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0143-7496 |
ispartof | International journal of adhesion and adhesives, 2012-03, Vol.33, p.89-97 |
issn | 0143-7496 1879-0127 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1010893170 |
source | ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Adhesion Adhesion in surgery and medicine Adhesion tests Adhesives Applied sciences Biocompatibility Biodegradability Biological adhesion Bone adhesives Bones Design engineering Exact sciences and technology Glues Novel adhesives Physicochemistry of polymers Polymer industry, paints, wood Technology of polymers |
title | Bone adhesives for trauma surgery: A review of challenges and developments |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T08%3A29%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bone%20adhesives%20for%20trauma%20surgery:%20A%20review%20of%20challenges%20and%20developments&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20adhesion%20and%20adhesives&rft.au=Farrar,%20David%20F.&rft.date=2012-03-01&rft.volume=33&rft.spage=89&rft.epage=97&rft.pages=89-97&rft.issn=0143-7496&rft.eissn=1879-0127&rft.coden=IJAADK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1010893170%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1010893170&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0143749611001655&rfr_iscdi=true |