| Literature DB >> 26053395 |
Alexandre Kaempfen1,2, Atanas Todorov3, Sinan Güven4, René D Largo5,6, Claude Jaquiéry7, Arnaud Scherberich8, Ivan Martin9, Dirk J Schaefer10.
Abstract
The gold standard treatment of large segmental bone defects is autologous bone transfer, which suffers from low availability and additional morbidity. Tissue engineered bone able to engraft orthotopically and a suitable animal model for pre-clinical testing are direly needed. This study aimed to evaluate engraftment of tissue-engineered bone with different prevascularization strategies in a novel segmental defect model in the rabbit humerus. Decellularized bone matrix (Tutobone) seeded with bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells was used directly orthotopically or combined with a vessel and inserted immediately (1-step) or only after six weeks of subcutaneous "incubation" (2-step). After 12 weeks, histological and radiological assessment was performed. Variable callus formation was observed. No bone formation or remodeling of the graft through TRAP positive osteoclasts could be detected. Instead, a variable amount of necrotic tissue formed. Although necrotic area correlated significantly with amount of vessels and the 2-step strategy had significantly more vessels than the 1-step strategy, no significant reduction of necrotic area was found. In conclusion, the animal model developed here represents a highly challenging situation, for which a suitable engineered bone graft with better prevascularization, better resorbability and higher osteogenicity has yet to be developed.Entities:
Keywords: animal model; bone resorption; decellularized bone; osteosynthesis vascularization; tissue engineering
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26053395 PMCID: PMC4490464 DOI: 10.3390/ijms160612616
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1(A) Amount of nucleated cells extracted per bone marrow biopsy; each dot represents one donor; (B) Percentage of colony forming units per nucleated cells extracted from bone marrow biopsy; (C) Silicon mold with scaffold during seeding; (D) Tetrazolium (MTT) staining showing the distribution of cells along the periphery after seeding: the top image is a midline section, and the bottom is the outside surface. Black bar represents 1 mm.
Figure 2(A) Experimental set-up of the different groups; (B) Representative intraoperative images of the orthotopic defect.
Figure 3(A) Follow-up radiological image showing scaffold in orthotopical defect after 10 weeks. Callus formation is visible on the opposite side of the plate. Arrows indicate proximal and distal edges of defect, white bar represents 5 mm; (B) Radiological quantification of callus as seen in (A), represented as average mm of radioopaque mass at the proximal and distal edges of the defect. Dotted line represents normal bone diameter at the same location; (C) Macroscopical appearance after plate removal. Arrows indicate the edges of the defect; (D) Post-explantation microtomography. Red bar represents 1 mm. None of the groups displayed macroscopic or microradiographic evidence of fracture consolidation during the experimental period.
Figure 4(A) Analysis of necrotic core formation based on hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. Blue rectangle indicates the total area considered during quantification. Black dotted outline is an example of necrotic area. Black bar represents 1 mm; (B) Necrotic area observed in the experimental groups, represented as fold of the average necrotic area in the pedicle 2-step group; (C) Representative Goldner Trichrome staining with vessels appearing red in high magnification. Black bar represents 50 mm; (D) Average vessel number inside the scaffold (blue rectangle in A), counted by Goldner Tichrome staining. Significant difference is marked by *; (E) Correlation of vessel number and necrotic area for each sample. Black line represents linear regression fit and dotted lines represent 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 5Representative tartrate resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) stainings. Black bar represents 50 mm in each image. (A) Schematical display of TRAP staining location; (B) Normal bone has closely associated TRAP positive osteoclasts; (C) Periost around fracture displays increased presence of TRAP positive cells; (D) Tutobone scaffold with invading granulation tissue, however no closely associated TRAP positive cells.