Effects of hydrogen peroxide cleaning procedures on bone graft osteoinductivity and mechanical properties
Bone allografts are frequently used during orthopaedic trauma cases or other reconstructive procedures. Most allografts are processed and cleaned before use. Our goals were to determine if an improved cleaning procedure compromises the strength or osteoinductivity of a graft. We compared our improve...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cell and tissue banking 2005-12, Vol.6 (4), p.287-298 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Bone allografts are frequently used during orthopaedic trauma cases or other reconstructive procedures. Most allografts are processed and cleaned before use. Our goals were to determine if an improved cleaning procedure compromises the strength or osteoinductivity of a graft. We compared our improved cleaning procedure to our standard cleaning procedure on cortical bone allograft. The cleaning procedures are generally composed of a series of chemical steps with nonionic detergents, hydrogen peroxide, and alcohol under time and temperature control, subjected to ultrasonic agitation. We tested the compressive strength, impact strength, and shear strength following the standard and improved cleaning procedures. Osteoinductivity was tested in 4 groups, using the improved cleaning procedure with four different hydrogen peroxide cleaning times: 0, 1, 3, and 5 h. Osteoinductivity was evaluated in vivo, using a 28-day implant in the hamstring muscle of an athymic, nude mouse. Results demonstrated that osteoinductivity is maintained with cleaning in hydrogen peroxide for up to 1 h, and that compressive strength, impact strength, and shear strength were all unaffected by the improved cleaning procedure. The improved cleaning procedure therefore did not compromise the strength or osteoinductivity of cortical bone allografts in comparison to the standard procedure. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1389-9333 1573-6814 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10561-005-3148-2 |