ArticleHeliyon2024
Enhancing orthopedic outcomes: A comparative analysis of gentamicin sulphate and nanosilver in bone cement.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mechanical Properties and Functional Assessment of PMMA Bone Cements Modified with Glassy Carbon.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Orthopedic surgeries frequently utilize bone cement, which can increase the risk of postoperative infections. Addressing this challenge, this study aims to enhance the mechanical, physical, and handling properties of bone cement by integrating gentamicin sulfate (GS) and nanosilver (nAg). The objective is to evaluate and compare the effects of these additives on properties such as compressive strength, flexural strength, doughing time, working time, setting time, and exothermic temperature. By doing so, the study seeks to identify a safer and more effective alternative to traditional antibiotics in bone cement formulations, thereby improving clinical outcomes in orthopedic procedures. Methods: This research involved a comparative analysis of modified cements against standard cements, focusing on compressive strength, flexural strength, doughing time, working time, setting time, and exothermic temperature. Various bone cement samples with GS and nAg additives were prepared and tested in accordance with international standards (ISO 5833:2002 and ASTM F451). Statistical analysis, including one-way and two-way ANOVA tests, was used to assess the significance of the results. Results: nAg-loaded cements exhibit mechanical and physical properties on par with or supe-rior to those of GS-loaded and standard cements. Notably, nAg incorporation leads to significantly lower exothermic temperatures, reducing the risk of thermal bone tissue damage. This finding highlights that nAg-loaded cement is a safer alternative. Alongside unaltered or enhanced strength, nAgs demonstrate promise for orthopedic applications, particularly in primary arthroplasty. Additionally, nAgs reduce doughing time, enhancing the practicality of these methods in surgical settings. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study underscores the potential advantages of incorporating GSs and nAgs into bone cement. nAg-loaded cement offers improved properties and reduced infection risk, making it a valuable choice for orthopedic procedures. It enhances both mechanical performance and safety, addressing crucial concerns in orthopedic surgery.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.