Discarding specimens for fatigue testing of orthopaedic bone cement: A comment on cristofolini et al. (2000) Fatigue Fract. Engng. Mater. Struct. 23, 953-957 (multiple letters)

Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 315-316

  Prendergast, P J ^a   Murphy, B P ^a   Taylor, D ^a   Cristofolini, L ^a   Minari, C ^a   Viceconti, M ^a  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036501261     PISSN: 8756758X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-2695.2002.00497.x     Document Type: Letter

References (7)

1. 1 Cristofolini, L., Minari, C. and Viceconti, M. (2000) A methodology criterion for acrylic bone cement fatigue tests. Fatigue Fract. Engng. Mater. Struct. 23, 953–957.
2. 2 Wang, J.‐S., Toksvig‐Larsen, S., Müller‐Wille, P. and Frazén, H. (1996) Is there any difference between vacuum mixing systems in reducing bone cement porosity. J. Biomed. Mater. Res.: Appl. Biomater. 33, 115–119.
3. 3 Jasty, M., Maloney, W. J., Bragdon, C. R. et al. (1991) The initiation of failure in cemented femoral components of hip arthroplasties. J. Bone Joint Surg. 73B, 551–558.
4. 4 Topoleski, L. D. T., Ducheyne, P. and Cuckler, J. M. (1990) A fractographic analysis of in vivo poly (methyl methacrylate) bone cement failure mechanisms. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 24, 135–154.
5. 5 Murphy, B. P. and Prendergast, P. J. (2000) On the magnitude and variability of the fatigue strength of acrylic bone cement. Int. J. Fatigue 22, 855–864.
6. 6 Lewis, G. (1999) Effect of mixing method and storage temperature of cement constituents on the fatigue and porosity of acrylic bone cement. J. Biomed. Mater. Res.: Appl. Biomater. 48, 143–149.
7. 7 Kuhr, K.‐D. (2000) Bone Cements: An Up‐to‐Date Comparison of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Commercial Materials. Springer, Berlin.