| Literature DB >> 25098717 |
Y J Liu1, Z Y Yang1, L L Tan2, H Li1, Y Z Zhang1.
Abstract
Our objective was to observe the biodegradable and osteogenic properties of magnesium scaffolding under in vivo conditions. Twelve 6-month-old male New Zealand white rabbits were randomly divided into two groups. The chosen operation site was the femoral condyle on the right side. The experimental group was implanted with porous magnesium scaffolds, while the control group was implanted with hydroxyapatite scaffolds. X-ray and blood tests, which included serum magnesium, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), creatinine (CREA), and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) were performed serially at 1, 2, and 3 weeks, and 1, 2, and 3 months. All rabbits were killed 3 months postoperatively, and the heart, kidney, spleen, and liver were analyzed with hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining. The bone samples were subjected to microcomputed tomography scanning (micro-CT) and hard tissue biopsy. SPSS 13.0 (USA) was used for data analysis, and values of P<0.05 were considered to be significant. Bubbles appeared in the X-ray of the experimental group after 2 weeks, whereas there was no gas in the control group. There were no statistical differences for the serum magnesium concentrations, ALT, BUN, and CREA between the two groups (P>0.05). All HE-stained slices were normal, which suggested good biocompatibility of the scaffold. Micro-CT showed that magnesium scaffolds degraded mainly from the outside to inside, and new bone was ingrown following the degradation of magnesium scaffolds. The hydroxyapatite scaffold was not degraded and had fewer osteoblasts scattered on its surface. There was a significant difference in the new bone formation and scaffold bioabsorption between the two groups (9.29 ± 1.27 vs 1.40 ± 0.49 and 7.80 ± 0.50 vs 0.00 ± 0.00 mm3, respectively; P<0.05). The magnesium scaffold performed well in degradation and osteogenesis, and is a promising material for orthopedics.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25098717 PMCID: PMC4165299 DOI: 10.1590/1414-431x20144009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Med Biol Res ISSN: 0100-879X Impact factor: 2.590
Figure 1Example of the magnesium scaffold (top right) and hydroxyapatite scaffold (bottom left).
Figure 2There was no sign of gas formation in the X-ray of New Zealand rabbit knee with the HA scaffold 2 weeks after implantation (A). There were signs of gas formation in the x-ray of New Zealand rabbit knee with the Mg scaffold 2 weeks after implantation (B).
Figure 3Micro-CT image of the magnesium scaffold: the new bone tissue in-growth 3 months post-operation (A). Micro-CT image of hydroxyapatite scaffold: visible new bone scattered on the surface of hydroxyapatite 3 months post-operation (B) (green indicates newly generated bone tissue).
Figure 4Hematoxylin-eosin staining of the heart (A), liver (B), kidney (C), and spleen (D) of the rabbit with magnesium scaffold 3 months after implantation showed no pathological changes (40×).
Figure 5There was obvious new bone formation in the hard-tissue sections of the magnesium scaffold and surrounding tissue 3 months post-operation (A). There was no obvious new bone formation in the hard-tissue sections of the hydroxyapatite scaffold and surrounding tissue 3 months post-operation (B). Methylene blue-magenta staining (100×).