| Literature DB >> 26719896 |
Pengfei Lei1, Rongxin Sun2, Long Wang1, Jialin Zhou3, Lifei Wan4, Tianjian Zhou5, Yihe Hu1.
Abstract
<span class="abstract_title">BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Deproteinization is an indispn>ensable process for t<span class="Chemical">he elimination of antigenicity in xenograft bones. However, the hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) deproteinized xenograft, which is commonly used to repair bone defect, exhibits limited osteoinduction activity. The present study was designed to develop a new method for deproteinization and compare the osteogenic capacities of new pepsin deproteinized xenograft bones with those of conventional H2O2 deproteinized ones.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26719896 PMCID: PMC4699924 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The morphologies of xenograft bones deproteinized by different methods.
(A) The macroscopic view of H2O2 and pepsin deproteinized bovine cancellous bones. (B) The microscopic view (40×: upper panel, 200×: bottom panel) of Ctl, H2O2 and pepsin deproteinized bovine cancellous bones. The deproteinized bones were decalcified prior to paraffin section and HE staining, the arrow indicates adipose tissue. (C) SEM images of Ctl, H2O2 and pepsin deproteinized bovine cancellous bones. Ctl: non-deproteinized fresh bones.
The mean value of pore size and porosity in each groups.
| Groups | H2O2 | Pepsin | Ctl (non-deproteinized) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 512 | 477 | 799 |
|
| 45.02 | 43.08 | 35.33 |
Compared with Ctl,
* P < 0.05.
Fig 2The biochemical and biomechanical analysis of H2O2 and pepsin deproteinized xenograft bones (n≥5) (A) The protein content (g/100g) and hydroxyproline content (μg/mg) of bovine cancellous bones in different groups. Bones were ground and subjected to the Kjeldahl method and HPLC-MS for protein content and hydroxyproline content, respectively. (B) The biomechanical properties of each group. No differences were observed in maximum compression load (Mpa) and bending load (Mpa).
Compared with Ctl, * P < 0.05. Compared with H2O2, # P < 0.05.
Fig 3(A) In vitro cellular affinity assay showed high cell proliferation of osteoblasts in pepsin treated bones (left) and H2O2 treated bones (right) (magnification × 550). (B) The AKP activity was significantly increased in osteoblasts and pepsin treated bones co-culture system.
Compared with Ctl, *** P < 0.001. Compared with H2O2, ### P < 0.001.
Fig 4Quantification of calcium deposits of osteoblast cultured on pepsin treated bones, H2O2 treated bones and non-deproteinized fresh bones on day 14 (left) and day 28 (right).
Compared with Ctl, * P < 0.05. Compared with H2O2, # P < 0.05.
Fig 5The X-ray analysis showed the osteogensis performance of different graft materials (n = 5).
Different graft materials were implanted in defect sites, the X-ray images were taken 0 day (D 0), 4 weeks (4 w), 8 weeks (8 w) and 12 weeks (12 w) after bone grafting, respectively. The X-ray results were scored by Lane-Sandhu grading method and the statistical data were shown in the right panel. Compared with H2O2, * P < 0.05.
Fig 6The micro-CT analysis showed the bone quantity and quality in different groups (n = 5).
The following parameters were measured at the indicated time points: bone volume fraction (BVF), tissue mineral content (TMC), tissue mineral density (TMD), trabecular number (Tb.N), trabecular separation (Tb.sp), trabecular thickness (Tb.th) and structure model index (SMI). Compared with H2O2, * P < 0.05.
Fig 7The histological analysis of bones in the defect sites of different groups.
The defect sites of radius in each group were dissected and subjected to HE staining. The pictures on the left side of each group represent the low power microscopic views (40 ×); the magnified views of boxed areas (200 ×) were shown on the right side of each group.
Fig 8Pepsin deproteinized xenograft bones reduces immune-reactivity upon bone grafting.
The activity of cellular immunity (CD4+/CD8+ ratio) was significantly higher in H2O2 group when compared with that in the pepsin group (A); humoral immunity activity (IgG level) was expressed at a lower level at the donor site in the pepsin group (B).