Literature DB >> 21597269

The nature and role of periosteum in bone and cartilage regeneration.

Seika Matsushima1, Noritaka Isogai, Robin Jacquet, Elizabeth Lowder, Taku Tokui, William J Landis.   

Abstract

This study was undertaken to determine whether periosteum from different bone sources in a donor results in the same formation of bone and cartilage. In this case, periosteum obtained from the cranium and mandible (examples of tissue supporting intramembranous ossification) and the radius and ilium (examples of tissues supporting endochondral ossification) of individual calves was used to produce tissue-engineered constructs that were implanted in nude mice and then retrieved after 10 and 20 weeks. Specimens were compared in terms of their osteogenic and chondrogenic potential by radiography, histology, and gene expression levels. By 10 weeks of implantation and more so by 20 weeks, constructs with cranial periosteum had developed to the greatest extent, followed in order by ilium, radius, and mandible periosteum. All constructs, particularly with cranial tissue although minimally with mandibular periosteum, had mineralized by 10 weeks on radiography and stained for proteoglycans with safranin-O red (cranial tissue most intensely and mandibular tissue least intensely). Gene expression of type I collagen, type II collagen, runx2, and bone sialoprotein (BSP) was detectable on QRT-PCR for all specimens at 10 and 20 weeks. By 20 weeks, the relative gene levels were: type I collagen, ilium >> radial ≥ cranial ≥ mandibular; type II collagen, radial > ilium > cranial ≥ mandibular; runx2, cranial >>> radial > mandibular ≥ ilium; and BSP, ilium ≥ radial > cranial > mandibular. These data demonstrate that the osteogenic and chondrogenic capacity of the various constructs is not identical and depends on the periosteal source regardless of intramembranous or endochondral ossification. Based on these results, cranial and mandibular periosteal tissues appear to enhance bone formation most and least prominently, respectively. The appropriate periosteal choice for bone and cartilage tissue engineering and regeneration should be a function of its immediate application as well as other factors besides growth rate.
Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21597269      PMCID: PMC3178095          DOI: 10.1159/000324642

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cells Tissues Organs        ISSN: 1422-6405            Impact factor:   2.481


  13 in total

1.  Physiologic subperiosteal new bone formation: prevalence, distribution, and thickness in neonates and infants.

Authors:  David S Kwon; Melissa R Spevak; Kenneth Fletcher; Paul K Kleinman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  In vivo engineering of organs: the bone bioreactor.

Authors:  Molly M Stevens; Robert P Marini; Dirk Schaefer; Joshua Aronson; Robert Langer; V Prasad Shastri
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-07-29       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Comparison of different chondrocytes for use in tissue engineering of cartilage model structures.

Authors:  Noritaka Isogai; Hirohisa Kusuhara; Yoshito Ikada; Hitoshi Ohtani; Robin Jacquet; Jennifer Hillyer; Elizabeth Lowder; William J Landis
Journal:  Tissue Eng       Date:  2006-04

4.  Formation of phalanges and small joints by tissue-engineering.

Authors:  N Isogai; W Landis; T H Kim; L C Gerstenfeld; J Upton; J P Vacanti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Bone fragility: failure of periosteal apposition to compensate for increased endocortical resorption in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Pawel Szulc; Ego Seeman; François Duboeuf; Elisabeth Sornay-Rendu; Pierre D Delmas
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  The chondrogenic potential of periosteum decreases with age.

Authors:  S W O'Driscoll; D B Saris; Y Ito; J S Fitzimmons
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  Design and assessment of a tissue-engineered model of human phalanges and a small joint.

Authors:  W J Landis; R Jacquet; J Hillyer; E Lowder; A Yanke; L Siperko; S Asamura; H Kusuhara; M Enjo; S Chubinskaya; K Potter; N Isogai
Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  Analysis of connective tissues by laser capture microdissection and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.

Authors:  Robin Jacquet; Jennifer Hillyer; William J Landis
Journal:  Anal Biochem       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 3.365

Review 9.  The role of periosteum in cartilage repair.

Authors:  S W O'Driscoll; J S Fitzsimmons
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Development of bone and cartilage in tissue-engineered human middle phalanx models.

Authors:  Yoshitaka Wada; Mitsuhiro Enjo; Noritaka Isogai; Robin Jacquet; Elizabeth Lowder; William J Landis
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.845

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Elucidating multiscale periosteal mechanobiology: a key to unlocking the smart properties and regenerative capacity of the periosteum?

Authors:  Sarah F Evans; Hana Chang; Melissa L Knothe Tate
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 6.389

2.  3D-tracking the regenerative potential of the mandible with micro-CTs.

Authors:  Benedicta Elisabeth Beck-Broichsitter; Anne Garling; Till Koehne; Florian Barvencik; Ralf Smeets; Christian Mehl; Anke Jeschke; Jörg Wiltfang; Stephan Thomas Becker
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014-02-28

3.  A Method for the Immunohistochemical Identification and Localization of Osterix in Periosteum-Wrapped Constructs for Tissue Engineering of Bone.

Authors:  Phillip McClellan; Robin Jacquet; Qing Yu; William J Landis
Journal:  J Histochem Cytochem       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 2.479

Review 4.  Tissue-engineered mandibular bone reconstruction for continuity defects: a systematic approach to the literature.

Authors:  Nattharee Chanchareonsook; Rüdiger Junker; Leenaporn Jongpaiboonkit; John A Jansen
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 6.389

Review 5.  Nanofiber-based delivery of bioactive agents and stem cells to bone sites.

Authors:  Zhanpeng Zhang; Jiang Hu; Peter X Ma
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 15.470

6.  Simultaneous Osteoperiosteal Autologous Iliac Crest Graft and Lateral Meniscus Allograft Transplantation for Osteochondral Lesion with Bony Defect and Lateral Discoid Meniscus Tear.

Authors:  Dhong Won Lee; Jin Goo Kim; Jeong Ku Ha; Woo Jong Kim
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2016-06-01

7.  Autologous temporomandibular joint reconstruction independent of exogenous additives: a proof-of-concept study for guided self-generation.

Authors:  Jiao Wei; Tanja Herrler; Dong Han; Kai Liu; Rulin Huang; Markus Guba; Chuanchang Dai; Qingfeng Li
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  An immunohistochemistry study of Sox9, Runx2, and Osterix expression in the mandibular cartilages of newborn mouse.

Authors:  Hong Zhang; Xiaopeng Zhao; Zhiguang Zhang; Weiwei Chen; Xinli Zhang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 9.  Strategies and First Advances in the Development of Prevascularized Bone Implants.

Authors:  Christoph Rücker; Holger Kirch; Oliver Pullig; Heike Walles
Journal:  Curr Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2016-08-15

Review 10.  The Impact of Type 2 Diabetes on Bone Fracture Healing.

Authors:  Carlos Marin; Frank P Luyten; Bart Van der Schueren; Greet Kerckhofs; Katleen Vandamme
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 5.555

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.