Literature DB >> 21782988

Small animal bone healing models: standards, tips, and pitfalls results of a consensus meeting.

T Histing1, P Garcia, J H Holstein, M Klein, R Matthys, R Nuetzi, R Steck, M W Laschke, T Wehner, R Bindl, S Recknagel, E K Stuermer, B Vollmar, B Wildemann, J Lienau, B Willie, A Peters, A Ignatius, T Pohlemann, L Claes, M D Menger.   

Abstract

Small animal fracture models have gained increasing interest in fracture healing studies. To achieve standardized and defined study conditions, various variables must be carefully controlled when designing fracture healing experiments in mice or rats. The strain, age and sex of the animals may influence the process of fracture healing. Furthermore, the choice of the fracture fixation technique depends on the questions addressed, whereby intra- and extramedullary implants as well as open and closed surgical approaches may be considered. During the last few years, a variety of different, highly sophisticated implants for fracture fixation in small animals have been developed. Rigid fixation with locking plates or external fixators results in predominantly intramembranous healing in both mice and rats. Locking plates, external fixators, intramedullary screws, the locking nail and the pin-clip device allow different degrees of stability resulting in various amounts of endochondral and intramembranous healing. The use of common pins that do not provide rotational and axial stability during fracture stabilization should be discouraged in the future. Analyses should include at least biomechanical and histological evaluations, even if the focus of the study is directed towards the elucidation of molecular mechanisms of fracture healing using the largely available spectrum of antibodies and gene-targeted animals to study molecular mechanisms of fracture healing. This review discusses distinct requirements for the experimental setups as well as the advantages and pitfalls of the different fixation techniques in rats and mice.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21782988     DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2011.07.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  60 in total

1.  Nonvascularized Bone Graft Reconstruction of the Irradiated Murine Mandible: An Analogue of Clinical Head and Neck Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Kevin M Urlaub; Russell E Ettinger; Noah S Nelson; Jessie M Hoxie; Alicia E Snider; Joseph E Perosky; Yekaterina Polyatskaya; Alexis Donneys; Steven R Buchman
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2019 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 1.046

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of mouse diaphyseal femur fracture models.

Authors:  Zachary J Gunderson; Zachery R Campbell; Todd O McKinley; Roman M Natoli; Melissa A Kacena
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 2.586

3.  Fixation stability dictates the differentiation pathway of periosteal progenitor cells in fracture repair.

Authors:  Yusuke Hagiwara; Nathaniel A Dyment; Xi Jiang; Huang Jiang Ping; Cheryl Ackert-Bicknell; Douglas J Adams; David W Rowe
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Wireless Implantable Sensor for Noninvasive, Longitudinal Quantification of Axial Strain Across Rodent Long Bone Defects.

Authors:  Brett S Klosterhoff; Keat Ghee Ong; Laxminarayanan Krishnan; Kevin M Hetzendorfer; Young-Hui Chang; Mark G Allen; Robert E Guldberg; Nick J Willett
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 2.097

5.  The preclinical sheep model of high tibial osteotomy relating basic science to the clinics: standards, techniques and pitfalls.

Authors:  Dietrich Pape; Henning Madry
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-07-21       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  Fracture healing under healthy and inflammatory conditions.

Authors:  Lutz Claes; Stefan Recknagel; Anita Ignatius
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 20.543

7.  In Vivo Evaluation of Fracture Callus Development During Bone Healing in Mice Using an MRI-compatible Osteosynthesis Device for the Mouse Femur.

Authors:  Melanie Haffner-Luntzer; Fabian Müller-Graf; Romano Matthys; Alireza Abaei; René Jonas; Florian Gebhard; Volker Rasche; Anita Ignatius
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 1.355

8.  Attenuated human bone morphogenetic protein-2-mediated bone regeneration in a rat model of composite bone and muscle injury.

Authors:  Nick J Willett; Mon-Tzu A Li; Brent A Uhrig; Joel David Boerckel; Nathaniel Huebsch; Taran L Lundgren; Gordon L Warren; Robert E Guldberg
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2012-11-02       Impact factor: 3.056

9.  A simple critical-sized femoral defect model in mice.

Authors:  Bret H Clough; Matthew R McCarley; Carl A Gregory
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2015-03-15       Impact factor: 1.355

10.  The effects of hyperlipidemia on implant osseointegration in the mouse femur.

Authors:  Armand Keuroghlian; Ana Dilza Viana Barroso; Gary Kirikian; Olga Bezouglaia; Yin Tintut; Sotirios Tetradis; Peter Moy; Flavia Pirih; Tara Aghaloo
Journal:  J Oral Implantol       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 1.779

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.