Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr 15:25:75-81.
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.03.024. eCollection 2021 May-Jun.

In vitro elution characteristics of gentamicin- and teicoplanin-loaded CMW1 and Palacos R bone cement

Affiliations

In vitro elution characteristics of gentamicin- and teicoplanin-loaded CMW1 and Palacos R bone cement

M Nagy et al. J Orthop. .

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the in vitro elution characteristics of CMW1 and Palacos R bone cement loaded with gentamicin, teicoplanin, or in combination.

Methods: Four bone cement discs were prepared for each cement type. Disc 1 contained no antibiotics; disc 2 contained 0.5 g gentamicin; disc 3 contained 2 g teicoplanin; disc 4 contained 0.5 g gentamicin and 2 g teicoplanin. Elution studies were conducted using a fluorescence polarisation immunoassay technique and performed at intervals of 6 weeks.

Results: For CMW1, gentamicin and teicoplanin elution levels in combination discs were higher than those in the single antibiotic discs (p < 0.001 & p < 0.06). For Palacos R, gentamicin elution levels in combination discs were higher than those in the single antibiotic discs (p < 0.001), but teicoplanin elution levels in combination discs were lesser than that from the single antibiotic discs (p < 0.02). In single and combination discs, gentamicin elution levels in Palacos R were higher than those in CMW1 (p < 0.001 & p < 0.001). Palacos R eluted more teicoplanin than CMW1, except in combined disc with gentamicin, when less teicoplanin was eluted.

Conclusion: Antibiotic elution is higher in Palacos R than CMW1. Antibiotic combination in both cement types has the synergistic effect of increasing antibiotic elution, except for teicoplanin from Palacos R. When high elution of gentamicin is required, Palacos R is preferable. When high elution of teicoplanin is required, Palacos R with only teicoplanin is superior to CMW1.

Keywords: Antibiotic elution; Arthroplasty; Bone cement; CMW; Palacos.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare no conflict of interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Elution profiles of the log antibiotic measures from each disc type at each time point. These figures clearly show that there is a greater level of variability for gentamicin than for teicoplanin. CMW1 – Single, CMW1 cement disc loaded with a single antibiotic; CMW1 – Comb., CMW1 cement disc loaded with a combination of antibiotics; PAL–R – Single, Palacos R cement disc loaded with a single antibiotic; PAL–R – Comb., Palacos R cement loaded with a combination of antibiotics.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Gentamicin elution levels from CMW1 cement discs loaded with only gentamicin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Teicoplanin elution levels from CMW1 cement discs loaded with only teicoplanin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Gentamicin elution levels from Palacos R cement discs loaded with only gentamicin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Teicoplanin elution levels from Palacos R cement discs loaded with only teicoplanin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Total gentamicin elution levels for 6 weeks from Palacos R and CMW1 cement discs loaded with only gentamicin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Total teicoplanin elution levels for 6 weeks from Palacos R and CMW1 cement discs loaded with only teicoplanin (blue) and a combination of gentamicin and teicoplanin (red).

References

    1. Lenguerrand E., Whitehouse M.R., Beswick A.D., Jones S.A., Porter M.L., Blom A.W. Revision for prosthetic joint infection following hip arthroplasty: evidence from the National Joint Registry. Bone Joint Res. 2017;6:391–398. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.66.BJR-2017-0003.R1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Buchholz H. Uber die DepotwirkungeinigerAntibiotikabeiVermischungmit dem Kunstharzpalacos'. Chirurg. 1970;40:511–515. - PubMed
    1. Jacqueline C., Caillon J. Impact of bacterial biofilm on the treatment of prosthetic joint infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014;69:i37–i40. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku254. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sultan A.A., Samuel L.T., Umpierrez E. Routine use of commercial antibiotic-loaded bone cement in primary total joint arthroplasty: a critical analysis of the current evidence. Ann Transl Med. 2019;7:73. doi: 10.21037/atm.2018.11.50. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jameson S.S., Asaad A., Diament M. Antibiotic-loaded bone cement is associated with a lower risk of revision following primary cemented total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of 731 214 cases using National Joint Registry data. Bone Joint Lett J. 2019;101:1331–1347. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B11.BJJ-2019-0196.R1. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources