| Literature DB >> 24286235 |
Hui Yin Nam, Puvanan Karunanithi, Wagner Cheng Loo, Sangeetha Naveen, Hui Chen, Paisal Hussin, Lucy Chan, Tunku Kamarul.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Treatment of chondral injuries remains a major issue despite the many advances made in cartilage repair techniques. Although it has been postulated that the use of marrow stimulation in combination with cell-based therapy may provide superior outcome, this has yet to be demonstrated. A pilot study was thus conducted to determine if bone marrow derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) have modulatory effects on the repair outcomes of bone marrow stimulation (BMS) techniques.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24286235 PMCID: PMC3979160 DOI: 10.1186/ar4309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.156
Study design
| 1 | 6 | Supplement with autologous BM-MSCs |
| 2 | 6 | Single negative (BMS, no supplement) |
| 3 (control) | 6 | Double negative (no BMS, no supplement) |
Figure 1Full thickness chondral defects. (A) Chondral defects with 5 mm diameter chondrotome. (B) Removal of calcified cartilage layer with curette, leaving an intact subchondral bone plate. (C,D) Five drill holes per chondral defect can be clearly observed after being washed with saline.
Modified O’Driscoll histological and histochemical grading scale
| | |
| | |
| | 4 |
| | 2 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 3 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | |
| | 3 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | 3 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
| | |
| | 3 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 0 |
RT-PCR primers sequences (1st BASE Pte. Ltd., Singapore)
| Collagen II (Forward) | 5′-CTG GAT GCC ATG AAG GTT TT-3′ | 58.4 | 45.0 |
| Collagen II (Reverse) | 5′-TCT TGT CCT TGC TCT TGC TG-3′ | 60.4 | 50.0 |
| Aggrecan (Forward) | 5′-GCA AGT GGT CTT CCT TCT GG-3′ | 62.4 | 55.0 |
| Aggrecan (Reverse) | 5′-TTC CAC CAA TGT CGT ATC CA-3′ | 58.4 | 45.0 |
| Sox 9 (Forward) | 5′-TGA AGA AGG AGA GCG AGG AG-3′ | 62.4 | 55.0 |
| Sox 9 (Reverse) | 5′-GAC GTG CGG CTT GTT CTT-3′ | 59.9 | 55.6 |
| GAPDH (Forward) | 5′-GCT CTC TTC CAG CCT TCC TT-3′ | 62.4 | 55.0 |
| GAPDH (Reverse) | 5′-TAG AGG TCC TTG CGG ATG TC-3′ | 62.4 | 55.0 |
GC (%), GC content; Tm (°C), Melting temperature.
Figure 2Caprine bone marrow cell culture. At primary culture passage-0 (Day 6), fibroblastic as well as small clear cells can be observed. The number of clear cells was decreased during the passages and fibroblastic cells became dominant in culture.
Figure 3Immunophenotyping of caprine MSCs for expression of multiple CD antigens. (A) CD 29, (B) CD 44, (C) CD 45, and (D) CD 34.
Figure 4Tri-lineage differentiation potential of primary MSCs. (A) Osteogenic differentiation. (B) Adipogenic differentiation. (C) Chondrogenic differentiation.
Figure 5Macroscopic ICRS scoring of chondral defect repair. (Significance is represented by *).
Figure 6Histological images at the 29week. a. (A) Normal knee, (B) Chondral defect, (C) Defects treated with BMS, (D) Defect treated with autologous MSCs. (defect region s represented by ▼). b. Different images of histological staining (Saf-O and H&E) from the edge to the central lesion (1 to 5).
Figure 7Quantitative histologic evaluation of the regenerated cartilage using O’Driscoll scores. (Significance is represented by *).
Figure 8Comparison in the glycosaminoglycan/protein content in the pooled lesions within the different groups.
Figure 9Gene expression analyses of aggrecan, collagen II and SOX9 demonstrates variations between groups.