Physical and Mechanical Properties of PMMA Bone Cement Reinforced with Nano-sized Titania Fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
X-ray contrast medium (BaSO(4) or ZrO(2)) used in commercially available PMMA bone cements imparts a detrimental effect on mechanical properties, particularly on flexural strength and fracture toughness. These lower properties facilitate the chance of implant loosening resulting from cement mantle failure. The present study was performed to examine the mechanical properties of a commercially available cement (CMW1) by introducing novel nanostructured titania fibers (n-TiO(2) fibers) into the cement matrix, with the fibers acting as a reinforcing phase. The hydrophilic nature of the n-TiO(2) fibers was modified by using a bifunctional monomer, methacrylic acid. The n-TiO(2) fiber content of the cement was varied from 0 to 2 wt%. Along with the mechanical properties (fracture toughness (K (IC)), flexural strength (FS), and flexural modulus (FM)) of the reinforced cements the following properties were investigated: complex viscosity-versus-time, maximum polymerization temperature (T (max)), dough time (t (dough)), setting time (t (set)), radiopacity, and in vitro biocompatibility. On the basis of the determined mechanical properties, the optimized composition was found at 1 wt% n-TiO(2) fibers, which provided a significant increase in K (IC) (63%), FS (20%), and FM (22%), while retaining the handling properties and in vitro biocompatibility compared to that exhibited by the control cement (CMW1). Moreover, compared to the control cement, there was no significant change in the radiopacity of any of the reinforced cements at p = 0.05. This study demonstrated a novel pathway to augment the mechanical properties of PMMA-based cement by providing an enhanced interfacial interaction and strong adhesion between the functionalized n-TiO( 2) fibers and PMMA matrix, which enhanced the effective load transfer within the cement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".