Integrated system for preparation of bone cement and effects on cement quality and environment

We developed a prepacked mixing system for the preparation of bone cement. The system is based on mixing and collection of bone cement under a vacuum and serves as both the storage and mixing device for the cement components, thereby minimizing the exposure of the operating staff to the monomer and the risk for contamination of the cement during preparation. We evaluated the system using Palacos R and Simplex P. The cement produced was compared with cement obtained from a commercially available mixing system. Temperature evolution during curing, handling characteristics, density, and porosity of the cement obtained were analyzed. The results showed that the experimental system produces cement with physical properties (i.e., setting times and temperature, porosity, and density) equal to or better than those obtained with commercially available systems. Reducing the amount of monomer in the experimental system led to a reduction of the curing temperature without compromising the physical properties of the cements.

Is there any difference between vacuum mixing systems in reducing bone cement porosity?

Six vacuum mixing systems, Cemvac, Merck, Mitvac, Optivac, Osteobond, and Stryker, were tested using prechilled Palacos R bone cement to investigate the reduction of porosity compared to mixing at atmospheric pressure. In addition the Optivac, Osteobond, and Stryker were tested using Simplex P bone cement to find out if they were effective in reducing the porosity of a middle viscosity bone cement. All vacuum mixing systems reduced the number of macropores (> 1 mm) and micropores (0.1 mm < voids < 1 mm) and increased the density of both Palacos R and Simplex P. But only the Optivac, Stryker, and Merck systems reduced the area percentage of macropores with more than 50% compared to the control. When using Simplex P bone cement, all three mixing systems tested reduced the numbers and the area percentage of macropores compared to the control. The results show that vacuum mixing is effective in reducing the porosity in both a high viscosity cement such as Palacos R and a middle viscosity cement such as Simplex P. Not all systems tested were effective in reducing the number and size of large voids.

Comparison of three classes of human liver alcohol dehydrogenase. Emphasis on different substrate binding pockets

Conformational models of the three characterized classes of mammalian liver alcohol dehydrogenase were constructed using computer graphics based on the known three-dimensional structure of the E subunit of the horse enzyme (class I) and the primary structures of the three human enzyme classes. This correlates the substrate-binding pockets of the class I subunits (alpha, beta and gamma in the human enzyme) with those of the class II and III subunits (pi and chi, respectively) for three enzymes that differ in substrate specificity, inhibition pattern and many other properties. The substrate-binding sites exhibit pronounced differences in both shape and properties. Comparing human class I subunits with those of class II and III subunits there are no less than 8 and 10 replacements, respectively, out of 11 residues in the substrate pocket, while in the human class I isozyme variants, only 1-3 of these 11 positions differ. A single residue, Val294, is conserved throughout. The liver alcohol dehydrogenases, with different substrate-specificity pockets, resemble the patterns of other enzyme families such as the pancreatic serine proteases. The inner part of the substrate cleft in the class II and III enzymes is smaller than in the horse class I enzyme, because both Ser48 and Phe93 are replaced by larger residues, Thr and Tyr, respectively. In class II, the residues in the substrate pocket are larger in about half of the positions. It is rich in aromatic residues, four Phe and one Tyr, making the substrate site distinctly smaller than in the class I subunits. In class III, the inner part of the substrate cleft is narrow but the outer part considerably wider and more polar than in the class I and II enzymes. In addition, Ser (or Thr) and Tyr in class II and III instead of His51 may influence proton abstraction/donation at the active site.