Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 07(01): 25-30
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1633040
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Biomechanical Properties of Ethylene Oxide Sterilized and Cryopreserved Cortical Bone Allografts

M. Tshamala
1   From the Department of Small Animal Medicine, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
,
H. van Bree
2   From the Department of Diagnostic Imaging of Domestic Animals, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
,
D. Mattheeuws
1   From the Department of Small Animal Medicine, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received for publication 25 March 1993

Publication Date:
06 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

To evaluate changes during preservation, 76 femoral segments of cortical bone of dogs were tested biomechanically in order to determine their strength in compression, in bending and in torsion. These bones were wrapped in plastic-paper and they were sterilized with ethylene oxide 12%, at 30° C and 1.4 bars and preserved thereafter at 舑20° C. According to the applied loading test, three treatment groups were devised; each treatment group was subdivided into five groups: one control (fresh specimen) and four test-groups differing from each other by the preservation time; i.e. 3, 6, 9 or 12 months. Statistical analysis has demonstrated that there is not a significant difference between the test results for each test-group and its control. The conclusion of this study was that bones, treated as described above, can be stored up to one year without risks to significantly reduce their strength in compression, in bending and in torsion.

To evaluate changes during preservation, femoral segments of cortical bone of dogs were tested biomechanically in order to evaluate their resistance in compression, in bending and to twisting moments. These bones were wrapped in plastic-paper and they were sterilized with ethylene oxide 12%, at 30° C and 1.4 bars and preserved thereafter at -20 ° C. Statistical analysis has shown that there was not a significant difference between the test results for each test-group and its control. As a conclusion, bone allografts, treated as described above, can be stored up to one year without risks to reduce significantly, their resistance to compressive, bending and torsional loads.

Keywords

Ethylene oxide - bone allograft - orthopaedics - dog
 

  • References

  • 1 Mankin HJ, Doppelt SH, Sullivan TR, Tomford WW. Osteochondral and intercalary allograft transplantation in the manage-ment of malignant tumors of bone. Cancer 1982; 50: 613-30.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Nather A, Goh JCH, Lee JJ. Biomechanical strength of non-vascularised and vascularised diaphyseal bone transplants. An experimental study. J Bone Joint Surg 1990; 72-B: 1031-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Brown KLB, Cruess RL. Bone and cartilage transplantation in orthopaedic surgery. A review. J Bone Joint Surg 1982; 64-A: 270-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Friedlaender GE. Current concepts review bone-banking. J Bone Joint Surg 1982; 64-A: 307-11.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Komender J, Komender A, Dziedzic-Goclawska A, Ostrowski K. Radiation-sterilized bone grafts evaluated by electron spin resonance technique and mechanical tests. Transplantation Proceedings VIII 1976; Suppl 1: 25-37.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Friedlaender GE, Strong DM, Sell KE. Studies on the antigenicity of bone. I Freeze-dried and deep-frozen bone allo-grafts in rabbits. J Bone Joint Surg 1976; 58-A: 854-8.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Tomford WW, Doppelt SH, Mankin HJ, Friedlaender GE. Bone bank procedures. Clin Orthop 1983; 174: 15-21.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Johnson AL, Shokry MM, Stein LE. Preliminary study of ethylene oxide sterilization of full-thickness cortical allografts used in segmental femoral fracture repair. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 1050-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schena III CJ, Graham DL, Hoefle WD. Segmental freeze-dried and fresh cortical allografts in the canine femur. II. A sequential histological comparison over a one-year time interval. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1985; 21: 193-205.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Elves MW, Ford CHJ. A study of the humoral immune response to massive osteoarticular allografts in sheep. Clin Exper Immun 1976; 23: 360-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Friedlaender GE. Immune responses to osteochondral allografts. Current knowledge and future directions. Clin Orthop 1983; 174: 58-68.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Johnson AL. Principles and practical application of cortical-bone grafting techniques. Compend Small Anim 1988; 10: 906-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Burchardt H, Jones H, Glowczewskie F. et al. Freeze-dried allogeneic segmental cortical bone grafts in dogs. J Bone Joint Surg 1978; 60-A: 1082-90.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Johnson AL, Moutray M, Hoffmann WE. Effect of ethylene oxide sterilization and storage conditions on canine cortical bone harvested for banking. Vet Surg 1987; 16: 418-22.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Roe SC, Pijanowski GJ, Johnson AL. Biomechanical properties of canine cortical bone allografts: Effects of preparation and storage. Am J Vet Res 1988; 49: 873-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bright RW, Burchardt H. The biomechanical properties of preserved bone graft. In: Osteochondral Allografts: Biology, Banking and Clinical Applications. Friedlaender GE, Mankin HJ, Sell KE. (eds). Boston: Little, Brown and Co; 1984: 241-7.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Bright RW, Burstein AH. Material properties of preserved cortical bone. 24th Annual Meeting, Orthopaedics Research Society Dallas: 1978: 210.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Spengler DM, Carter DR, Baylink DJ, Lee R. Mechanical properties of whole bone: Effects of radiation. 24th Annual Meeting, Orthopaedics Research Society Dallas: 1978: 207.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sugimoto M, Takahashi S, Toguchida J. et al. Changes in bone after high-dose irradiation. Biomechanics and histomorphology. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73-B: 492-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nash WA. Theory and problems of strength of materials. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co; 1972
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Goldberg VM, Stevenson S, Shaffer JW. et al. Biological and physical properties of autogenous vascularised fibular grafts in dogs. J Bone Surg 1990; 72-A: 801-10.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Stevenson S. Bone grafting. In: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery, vol 2. Slatter DH. (ed). Philadelphia: Saunders; 1985: 2035-48.
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Pelker RR, Friedlaender GE, Markham TC. et al. Effects of freezing and freeze-drying on the biomechanical properties of rat bone. J Orthop Res 1984; 1: 405-11.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kraus KH. Healing of bone fractures. In: Surgical Complications and Wound Healing in the Small Animal Practice. Harari J. (ed). Philadelphia: Saunders; 1993: 203-21.
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Hulse D, Hyman B. Fracture biology and biomechanics. In: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery, vol 2. Slatter D. (ed). Philadelphia: Saunders; 1993: 1595-603.
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Johnson AL, Evrell JAC, Schaeffer DJ. Evaluation of canine cortical bone graft remodeling. Vet Surg 1992; 21: 293-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Friedlaender GE. Current concepts review bone grafts. The basic science rationale for clinical applications. J Bone Joint Surg 1987; 69-A: 786-90.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Seldin ED. A rheologic model for cortical bone. Acta Orthop Scand 1965; Suppl 83: 1-77.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Henry WB, Wadsworth PL. Diaphyseal allografts in the repair of long bone fractures. JAAHA 1981; a 525-34.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar