Literature DB >> 15539372

Bone repair in the twenty-first century: biology, chemistry or engineering?

Karin A Hing1.   

Abstract

Increases in reconstructive orthopaedic surgery, such as total hip replacement and spinal fusion, resulting from advances in surgical practice and the ageing population, have lead to a demand for bone graft that far exceeds supply. Consequently, a number of synthetic bone-graft substitutes (BGSs) have been developed with mixed success and surgical acceptance. Skeletal tissue regeneration requires the interaction of three basic elements: cells, growth factors (GFs) and a permissive scaffold. This can be achieved by pre-loading a synthetic scaffold with GFs or pre-expanded cells; however, a 'simpler' approach is to design intrinsic 'osteoinductivity' into your BGS, i.e. the capability to recruit and stimulate the patient's own GFs and stem cells. Through investigation of the mechanisms controlling bone repair in BGSs, linking interactions between the local chemical and physical environment, scientists are currently developing osteoinductive materials that can stimulate bone regeneration through control of the scaffold chemistry and structure. Moreover, this body of research is providing the foundations for future generations of BGSs and bone-repair therapies and may ultimately contribute towards improving the quality of life through maintenance of the skeleton and reversal of disease states, as opposed to the mending of broken bones that we currently practice. Will we be able to grow our own bones in a bioreactor for use as autologous graft materials in the future? Could surgery be limited to accidental trauma cases, with greater restoration of function through biochemical or gene therapies? The technology and research probes necessary to this task are currently being developed with the advent of nanotechnology, genomics and proteomics: are we about to embark on a chemical revolution in medicine? This paper aims to discuss some of the current thinking on the mechanisms behind bioactivity and biocompatibility in bone and how a fuller understanding of the interactions between cells and the materials used today could bring about completely new approaches for the treatment of bone fracture and disease tomorrow.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15539372     DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2004.1466

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci        ISSN: 1364-503X            Impact factor:   4.226


  60 in total

1.  Biphasic peptide amphiphile nanomatrix embedded with hydroxyapatite nanoparticles for stimulated osteoinductive response.

Authors:  Joel M Anderson; Jessica L Patterson; Jeremy B Vines; Amjad Javed; Shawn R Gilbert; Ho-Wook Jun
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 15.881

2.  Sequential delivery of BMP-2 and IGF-1 using a chitosan gel with gelatin microspheres enhances early osteoblastic differentiation.

Authors:  Sungwoo Kim; Yunqing Kang; Chad A Krueger; Milan Sen; John B Holcomb; Di Chen; Joseph C Wenke; Yunzhi Yang
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 8.947

Review 3.  Bioactive glasses as carriers for bioactive molecules and therapeutic drugs: a review.

Authors:  Jasmin Hum; Aldo R Boccaccini
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  Indirect rapid prototyping of biphasic calcium phosphate scaffolds as bone substitutes: influence of phase composition, macroporosity and pore geometry on mechanical properties.

Authors:  M Schumacher; U Deisinger; R Detsch; G Ziegler
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  [Bridging posttraumatic bony defects. Established and new methods].

Authors:  M Schieker; W Mutschler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 6.  New perspectives in rotator cuff tendon regeneration: review of tissue engineered therapies.

Authors:  Roberto Rotini; Milena Fini; Gianluca Giavaresi; Alessandro Marinelli; Enrico Guerra; Diego Antonioli; Alessandro Castagna; Roberto Giardino
Journal:  Chir Organi Mov       Date:  2008-03-03

7.  Correlating cell morphology and osteoid mineralization relative to strain profile for bone tissue engineering applications.

Authors:  M A Wood; Y Yang; E Baas; D O Meredith; R G Richards; J H Kuiper; A J El Haj
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 8.  [Bone substitutes].

Authors:  M Schieker; C Heiss; W Mutschler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.000

9.  Markers Are Shared Between Adipogenic and Osteogenic Differentiated Mesenchymal Stem Cells.

Authors:  Melanie Köllmer; Jason S Buhrman; Yu Zhang; Richard A Gemeinhart
Journal:  J Dev Biol Tissue Eng       Date:  2013-05-01

10.  Increasing the pore sizes of bone-mimetic electrospun scaffolds comprised of polycaprolactone, collagen I and hydroxyapatite to enhance cell infiltration.

Authors:  Matthew C Phipps; William C Clem; Jessica M Grunda; Gregory A Clines; Susan L Bellis
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 12.479

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.