| Literature DB >> 26914758 |
Alan Getgood1, Frances Henson2, Carrie Skelton3, Roger Brooks4, Hans Guehring5, Lisa A Fortier6, Neil Rushton7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of combining rhFGF18 or BMP-7 with a biphasic collagen/GAG osteochondral scaffold (Chondromimetic) on the repair of osteochondral defects in sheep.Entities:
Keywords: Biphasic scaffold; Osteochondral repair; Sheep; rhFGF18
Year: 2014 PMID: 26914758 PMCID: PMC4545804 DOI: 10.1186/s40634-014-0013-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Orthop ISSN: 2197-1153
ICRS repair score [16]
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| Level with surrounding cartilage | 4 |
| 75% repair of defect depth | 3 | |
| 50% repair of defect depth | 2 | |
| 25% repair of defect depth | 1 | |
| 0% repair of defect depth | 0 | |
|
| Complete integration with border zone | 4 |
| Demarcating border <1 mm | 3 | |
| ¾ of graft integrated, ¼ with notable border >1 mm | 2 | |
| ½ of graft integrated with surrounding cartilage, ½ with a notable border >1 mm | 1 | |
| From no contact to 1/4th of graft integrated with surrounding cartilage | 0 | |
|
| Intact smooth surface | 4 |
| Fibrillated surface | 3 | |
| Small, scattered fissures or cracks | 2 | |
| Several, small or few but large fissures | 1 | |
| Total degeneration of grafted area | 0 | |
|
|
|
Outerbridge score for macroscopic degenerative change [17]
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| Normal |
|
| Mild softening of the articular cartilage |
|
| Fibrillation and fissuring of chondral surface |
|
| Cracks in articular cartilage, no subchondral bone exposed |
|
| Full thickness chondral defects down to bone |
Modified O’Driscoll Histology Score [13]
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 80-100 | 8 | |
| 60-80 | 6 | |||
| 40-60 | 4 | |||
| 20-40 | 2 | |||
| 0-20 | 0 | |||
|
|
|
| Smooth and intact | 2 |
|
| Fissures | 1 | ||
| Severe disruption, fibrillation | 0 | |||
|
| Normal | 2 | ||
| Slight disruption, including cysts | 1 | |||
| Severe lack of integration | 0 | |||
|
| 100% of normal adjacent cartilage | 2 | ||
| 50-100% or thicker than normal | 1 | |||
| 0-50% | 0 | |||
|
| Bonded at both ends of graft | 2 | ||
| Bonded at one end/partially both ends | 1 | |||
| Not bonded | 0 | |||
|
|
| Normal cellularity, no clusters | 2 | |
| Slight hypocellularity, <25% chondrocyte clusters | 1 | |||
| Moderate hypocellularity, >25% clusters | 0 | |||
|
|
| Normal cellularity, no clusters, normal staining | 3 | |
| Normal cellularity, mild clusters, moderate staining | 2 | |||
| Mild or mod hypocellularity, slight staining | 1 | |||
| Severe hypocellularity, slight staining | 0 | |||
|
|
| complete reconstitution | 2 | |
| greater than 50% reconstitution | 1 | |||
| 50% or less reconstitution | 0 | |||
|
|
| complete and uninterrupted | 2 | |
| <100% but >50% recon | 1 | |||
| <50% complete | 0 | |||
|
|
| > 80% homogenous positive stain | 2 | |
| 40-80% homogenous positive stain | 1 | |||
| <40% homogenous positive stain | 0 | |||
|
|
|
Figure 1Macroscopic observation of degenerative change in the MFC and LTS at necropsy. The horizontal bars represent the mean value. Non-parametric analysis shows a statistically significant difference between the degeneration in the BMP-7 group compared with the scaffold only (p = 0.038).
Mean ICRS Repair Score for each category
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2.00 | 2.60 | 2.83 | 2.20 | 3.83 | 1.60 | 4.00 | 6.40 |
|
| 1.20 | 2.50 | 2.17 | 2.67 | 3.67 | 1.33 | 3.50 | 6.50 |
|
| 1.00 | 3.17 | 1.33 | 2.33 | 2.33 | 1.83 | 2.50 | 7.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| # | |||||
* and # indicate significant differences between specific groups p = 0.002. All other group comparisons p > 0.05.
Figure 2International Cartilage Repair Society gross repair score of MFC and LTS. Box and whisker plots represent the maximum and minimum values, the interquartile range with the horizontal bar representing the median value. Statistically significant differences were noted between the empty defects and rhFGF18 and BMP-7 in the MFC (p = 0.002) while no difference was found between groups in the LTS (p > 0.05).
Mechanical testing data
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 126.4 | 85.4 | 97.2 | 79.35 | 99.42 | 84.1 | 90.5 | 64.35 |
|
| 66.78 | 13.79 | 13.8 | 8.072 | 7.348 | 6.958 | 9.479 | 7.118 |
|
| 29.86 | 6.167 | 5.633 | 3.296 | 3 | 2.841 | 3.87 | 2.906 |
|
| 43.46 | 68.28 | 82.72 | 70.88 | 91.71 | 76.8 | 80.55 | 56.88 |
|
| 209.3 | 102.5 | 111.7 | 87.82 | 107.1 | 91.4 | 100.4 | 71.82 |
|
| * | # | * # | |||||
* and # indicate significant differences between specific groups p = 0.003. All other group comparisons p > 0.05.
Mean Modified O’Driscoll score for each category
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| 0.80 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.67 | 3.00 | 2.00 | 1.33 | 0.00 |
|
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0.20 | 0.75 | 1.17 | 1.83 | 1.83 | 1.33 | 0.67 | 0.83 | |
|
| 0.40 | 0.50 | 0.67 | 1.00 | 1.17 | 0.50 | 0.83 | 0.50 | |
|
| 0.80 | 0.75 | 0.83 | 0.83 | 1.33 | 0.67 | 1.00 | 0.33 | |
|
| 1.20 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 1.50 | 1.83 | 1.67 | 2.00 | 1.17 | |
|
|
| 0.60 | 0.25 | 0.67 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 0.83 | 1.00 | 0.50 |
|
|
| 1.80 | 1.75 | 2.17 | 1.50 | 2.33 | 2.33 | 2.50 | 2.33 |
|
|
| 1.00 | 0.75 | 0.33 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.83 | 1.17 | 0.50 |
|
|
| 1.60 | 1.00 | 1.33 | 1.67 | 1.83 | 1.67 | 2.00 | 1.33 |
|
|
| 0.60 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 1.33 | 1.50 | 0.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |||||||
* indicates significant differences between specific groups p = 0.039. All other group comparisons p > 0.05.
Figure 3The modified O’Driscoll score for both MFC and LTS (p > 0.05) showing comparison between groups. Statistically significant differences were observed between the rhFGF18 and empty defects in the MFC (p = 0.039) with no differences observed in the LTS between groups. Box and whisker plots represent the maximum and minimum values, the interquartile range with the horizontal bar representing the median value.
Figure 4Histological sections stained with Safranin O. A) Empty defect, B) Scaffold alone, C) Scaffold + rhFGF-18, D) Scaffold + BMP-7. In A, B and C there is good tissue fill. Differences in subchondral bone formation can be observed. The empty defect A shows subchondral hypertrophy, whilst in C and D there appears to be a cartilage cleft, with significant proteoglycan staining extending down into the subchondral bone. In D there is a large subchondral cyst. The arrows denote the margins of the defect.
Figure 5Representative sections showing different grades of integration of repair tissue to parent cartilage. Sections stained with Safranin O. Black arrows indicate the junction between repair tissue and parent cartilage. A) Poor repair tissue in the defect and no integration between this tissue and the parent cartilage. B) There is integration in this section but a hypocellularity at the junction with a small area of fissuring on the articular surface. C) Improved integration but hypocellularity at junction. D) Excellent integration between repair tissue (left hand side of arrow) and parent tissue (right hand side of arrow).
Figure 6Histological sections stained with Safranin O. A) Fibrocartilagenous repair tissue typical of that seen in empty defects, scaffold alone and BMP-7, B) Hyaline cartilage-like repair tissue typical of that seen in scaffold + rhFGF-18 treated defects.
Figure 7Histological sections following immunohistochemistry to detect type VI collagen. A) Empty defect, B) Scaffold alone, C) Scaffold + rhFGF-18, D) Scaffold + BMP-7. In A, where there is a fibrocartilagenous repair, there is little pericellular matrix staining with marked inter-territorial matrix staining. In C there is marked pericellular staining (black rings around the cells) indicating a more hyaline cartilage like repair tissue.