| Literature DB >> 26768536 |
Sungho Yun1, Sae-Kwang Ku2, Young-Sam Kwon3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to investigate the clinical effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) as the fundamental treatment of osteoarthritis (OA).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26768536 PMCID: PMC4714505 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-016-0342-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Oligonucleotides for real-time PCR used in this study
| Target | 5′–3′ | Sequence | NCBI accession no. |
|---|---|---|---|
| SOX9 | Sense | AAGCTCTGGAGGCTGCTGAA | NM_001002978.1 |
| Antisense | ACTTGTAATCCGGGTGGTCTTTC | ||
| Aggrecan | Sense | CTATGAGGACGGCTTTCACC | U65989.2 |
| Antisense | AGACCTCACCCTCCATCTCC | ||
| G3PDH | Sense | TATTGTCGCCATCAATGACC | NM_01003142 |
| Antisense | TACTCAGCACCAGCATCACC |
PCR polymerase chain reaction, NCBI National Center for Biotechnology Information
Fig. 1The lameness score of the OA dogs. Control, treated with 1 ml of PBS; PRP, treated with 1 ml of PRP; MSC, treated with 1.0 × 107 MSC in 1 ml of PBS; MP, treated with 1.0 × 107 MSC cell in 1 ml of PRP. Asterisk indicates significantly different with day 0 within PRP group by MW test; Number sign significantly different with day 0 within MP group by MW test
Fig. 2Focal compressive strengths on the femoral and tibial articular cartilages. Values are expressed as mean ± SD of six dogs, N (Newton). a p < 0.05 as compared with sham control by LSD test; b p < 0.05 as compared with control by LSD test; c p < 0.05 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test; d p < 0.01 and e p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
Mankin scores on the femur and tibia articular cartilages
| Groups | Femur | Tibia | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface damage | Hypocellularity | Clone | Stain intensity | Totalized (max = 12) | Surface damage | Hypocellularity | Clone | Stain intensity | Totalized (max = 12) | |
| Sham | 0.33 ± 0.52 | 0.17 ± 0.41 | 0.17 ± 0.41 | 0.33 ± 0.52 | 1.00 ± 0.63 | 0.17 ± 0.41 | 0.33 ± 0.52 | 0.17 ± 0.41 | 0.17 ± 0.41 | 0.83 ± 1.60 |
| Control | 2.50 ± 0.55a | 1.67 ± 0.52a | 1.33 ± 0.82a | 1.67 ± 0.52a | 7.17 ± 1.17a | 2.17 ± 0.41a | 2.17 ± 0.41a | 1.00 ± 0.63a | 1.50 ± 0.55a | 6.83 ± 1.17a |
| MSC | 1.00 ± 0.63bc | 0.83 ± 0.41bc | 1.17 ± 0.41a | 1.17 ± 0.41b | 4.17 ± 0.75ac | 0.67 ± 0.52c | 1.17 ± 0.41bc | 0.67 ± 0.52 | 1.33 ± 0.52a | 3.83 ± 0.75ac |
| PRP | 0.83 ± 0.41c | 0.83 ± 0.41bc | 0.83 ± 0.41b | 1.00 ± 0.00 | 3.50 ± 0.55ac | 0.50 ± 0.55c | 0.83 ± 0.75c | 0.67 ± 0.52 | 1.17 ± 0.41a | 3.17 ± 0.98ac |
| MP | 0.50 ± 0.55c | 0.33 ± 0.52c | 0.33 ± 0.52cf | 0.33 ± 0.52cf | 1.50 ± 1.38ceg | 0.33 ± 0.52c | 0.33 ± 0.52cf | 0.17 ± 0.41c | 0.50 ± 0.55ceh | 1.33 ± 1.21ceh |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD of six dogs
MSC mesenchymal stem cells, PRP platelet-rich plasma, MP MSC and PRP co-treatment
a p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by LSD test
b p < 0.05 as compared with sham control by LSD test
c p < 0.01 as compared with control by LSD test
d p < 0.05 as compared with control by LSD test
e p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test
f p < 0.05 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test
g p < 0.01 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
h p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
Fig. 3Representative general histopathological images and the thicknesses of the femoral and tibial articular cartilages. Of sham (a, b), control (c, d), MSC (e, f), PRP (g, h), and MP (i, j). H&E and Safranin O stain. Scale bars = 90 μm. a p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by LSD test; b p < 0.01 and c p < 0.05 as compared with control by LSD test; d p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test; e p < 0.01 and f p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
Fig. 4COL and GAG contents on the femoral articular cartilages. a p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by LSD test; b p < 0.01 and c p < 0.05 as compared with control by LSD test; d p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test; e p < 0.01 and f p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
Fig. 5mRNA expressions of aggrecan and SOX9 on the femoral and tibial articular cartilages. Values are expressed as mean ± SD of six dogs, relative to control/G3PDH mRNA. a p < 0.01 and b p < 0.05 as compared with sham control by LSD test; c p < 0.01 and d p < 0.05 as compared with control by LSD test; e p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test; f p < 0.01 and g p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
Fig. 6Representative immunohistochemical findings of femoral and tibial articular cartilage (BrdU, TNF-α, and PARP). Of sham (a, b), control (c, d), MSC (e, f), PRP (g, h), and MP (i, j). Scale bars = 90 μm
Immunohistochemical analysis on the femur articular cartilages
| Cell numbers (cells/mm2) | Sham | Control | MSC | PRP | MP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrdU+ | 144.17 ± 47.83 | 9.00 ± 2.83f | 55.00 ± 17.34fg | 77.17 ± 20.36g | 129.67 ± 31.39fghi |
| IL-1β+ | 14.67 ± 4.18 | 140.50 ± 16.69a | 50.83 ± 15.77ab | 44.50 ± 13.66ab | 23.50 ± 7.87bcd |
| TNF-α+ | 5.50 ± 4.09 | 103.00 ± 18.70f | 55.33 ± 18.91fg | 38.00 ± 10.16fg | 13.83 ± 3.66ghi |
| COX-2+ | 16.33 ± 2.73 | 102.67 ± 22.57f | 65.50 ± 10.21fg | 44.50 ± 10.21fg | 23.67 ± 6.92ghi |
| iNOS+ | 57.83 ± 15.82 | 196.67 ± 42.57a | 106.50 ± 17.60ab | 66.17 ± 10.53b | 40.33 ± 12.40bce |
| Caspase-3+ | 16.50 ± 8.87 | 80.33 ± 11.22a | 52.17 ± 12.62ab | 46.17 ± 11.86ab | 18.00 ± 8.46bcd |
| PARP+ | 30.00 ± 11.92 | 101.17 ± 21.64a | 64.17 ± 14.63ab | 54.50 ± 13.16ab | 32.50 ± 10.31bce |
| IFN-γ+ | 5.33 ± 3.27 | 88.33 ± 13.35a | 47.17 ± 11.51ab | 31.17 ± 15.28ab | 12.50 ± 2.88bcd |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD of six dogs
MSC mesenchymal stem cells, PRP platelet-rich plasma, MP MSC and PRP co-treatment
a p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by LSD test
b p < 0.01 as compared with control by LSD test
c p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test
d p < 0.01 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
e p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
f p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by MW test
g p < 0.01 as compared with control by MW test
h p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by MW test
i p < 0.01 as compared with PRP treated group by MW test
Immunohistochemical analysis on the tibia articular cartilages
| Cell numbers (cells/mm2) | Sham | Control | MSC | PRP | MP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrdU+ | 123.67 ± 24.40 | 7.00 ± 2.97h | 49.50 ± 12.69hj | 62.00 ± 16.09hj | 120.33 ± 29.27jkl |
| IL-1β+ | 5.33 ± 2.16 | 170.67 ± 19.94a | 63.50 ± 11.64ac | 41.33 ± 16.10ac | 15.67 ± 10.25cdf |
| TNF-α+ | 6.33 ± 3.14 | 141.00 ± 32.51a | 70.33 ± 14.17ac | 53.33 ± 15.24ac | 28.50 ± 10.45bcdg |
| COX-2+ | 4.00 ± 2.61 | 129.67 ± 44.74h | 61.67 ± 13.76hj | 37.50 ± 11.04hj | 18.33 ± 3.93hjkl |
| iNOS+ | 41.17 ± 17.88 | 243.00 ± 54.32h | 124.33 ± 45.37hj | 73.00 ± 10.97ij | 47.60 ± 13.17ikl |
| Caspase-3+ | 6.00 ± 3.85 | 102.50 ± 27.06h | 43.17 ± 12.48hj | 25.83 ± 5.53hj | 15.33 ± 4.63hjk |
| PARP+ | 45.67 ± 10.63 | 134.67 ± 38.53a | 68.33 ± 17.49c | 63.33 ± 19.03c | 39.67 ± 12.36ceg |
| IFN-γ+ | 7.50 ± 2.43 | 49.67 ± 11.40h | 28.33 ± 5.79hj | 22.33 ± 3.27hj | 13.83 ± 3.82jkl |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD of six dogs
MSC mesenchymal stem cells, PRP platelet-rich plasma, MP MSC and PRP co-treatment
a p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by LSD test
b p < 0.05 as compared with sham control by LSD test
c p < 0.01 as compared with control by LSD test
d p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test
e p < 0.05 as compared with MSC treated group by LSD test
f p < 0.01 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
g p < 0.05 as compared with PRP treated group by LSD test
h p < 0.01 as compared with sham control by MW test
i p < 0.05 as compared with sham control by MW test
j p < 0.01 as compared with control by MW test
k p < 0.01 as compared with MSC treated group by MW test
l p < 0.01 as compared with PRP treated group by MW test