| Literature DB >> 27525982 |
Dianne Little1,2, Stephen Johnson3, Jonathan Hash4, Steven A Olson3, Bradley T Estes3,5, Franklin T Moutos3,5, B Duncan X Lascelles4, Farshid Guilak5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hip is one of the most common sites of osteoarthritis in the body, second only to the knee in prevalence. However, current animal models of hip osteoarthritis have not been assessed using many of the functional outcome measures used in orthopaedics, a characteristic that could increase their utility in the evaluation of therapeutic interventions. The canine hip shares similarities with the human hip, and functional outcome measures are well documented in veterinary medicine, providing a baseline for pre-clinical evaluation of therapeutic strategies for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a surgical model of hip osteoarthritis in a large laboratory animal model and to evaluate functional and end-point outcome measures.Entities:
Keywords: Articular cartilage repair; Collagen; Inflammation; Pain; Proteoglycan; Synovium; Tissue engineering
Year: 2016 PMID: 27525982 PMCID: PMC4987758 DOI: 10.1186/s40634-016-0053-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Orthop ISSN: 2197-1153
Fig. 1(A) Distraction index of operated and control limbs as assessed by radiography. *Operated significantly less than control limb (p = 0.04). (B) Modified Lane radiographic scores of operated and control limbs. *Significantly greater score than control limb (p = 0.022). Bars sharing the same letters are not significantly different from each other (p < 0.05), n = 7. (C) Preoperative (a,c) and 20-week (b,d) radiographs of control (a,b) and operated (c,d) limbs. Range in radiographic appearance of preoperative femoral head phenotype from normal (e) to dysplastic (f). Open arrow heads indicate circumferential linear femoral head osteophytes, and closed arrow heads indicate caudal curvilinear femoral neck osteophytes
Fig. 2a Change in bodyweight compared to preoperative values. *Week 20 differs from weeks 1–5 (p = 0.03). +Week 19 differs from weeks 1 and 2 (p = 0.03). b Pre- and postoperative limb circumference in control and operated limbs. *Control and operated are different (p < 0.007). #Significantly different from preoperative within the same limb (p < 0.03). c Difference in total range of motion between control and operated limbs pre- and postoperatively. *Different from time 0 (p < 0.04). d Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale – Short Form. *Day 1 different from day 0 (p < 0.0001). #Weeks 6–21 different from day 1 (p < 0.02). e Canine Brief Pain Inventory. #Different from all other time points (p < 0.001). *Different from preoperative (p < 0.04)
Fig. 3a Mean total daytime (light phase) and nighttime (dark phase) activity counts for each 12-h time period over a 7-day recording period. *Significantly different from every other day data point (p < 0.02). #Different from time 0 day (p < 0.04). +Same as week 1 day (p > 0.05). b Mean number of daytime (light phase) rest periods and nighttime (dark phase) activity bouts for each 12-h cycle over a 7-day recording period. *p < 0.04, # < 0.05. c Mean total duration of daytime (light phase) rest periods and nighttime (dark phase) activity bouts over each 12-h cycle over a 7-day recording period. d Mean total activity count each hour over a 24-h cycle and 7-day recording period—one-way within-subjects analysis of variance with multiple dependent measures (time of day and postoperative time). *Different between preoperative and 20 weeks postoperatively within subject
Fig. 4a Duty factor for each limb preoperatively and at 20 weeks postoperatively. IL = ipsilateral forelimb (same side forelimb); CL = contralateral forelimb (diagonal forelimb). b Ratio of peak vertical force for operated limb compared to all other limbs preoperatively and at 20 weeks postoperatively. O:C = operated vs. control; O:CL = operated vs. contralateral forelimb; O:IL = operated vs. ipsilateral forelimb. c Ratio of impulse for operated limb compared to all other limbs preoperatively and at 20 weeks postoperatively. d Ratio of maximum peak pressure for operated limb compared to all other limbs preoperatively and at 20 weeks postoperatively. e Change in distribution of bodyweight to each limb at 20 weeks postoperatively compared to preoperatively, and between forelimbs (FL) and hind limbs (HL). *Different from preoperative; bars having different letters are significantly different
Fig. 5a Total modified Mankin scores for femoral head and acetabulum in control and operated hip joints, 20 weeks after surgery. *p = 0.03. b Safranin O/Fast Green images of the articular cartilage of zones 1 and 4 of the femoral head and acetabulum in control and operated hip joints. Scale bar = 100 μm. c Schematic of the mean modified Mankin scores by joint region in control and operated femoral head and acetabulum, with significant correlations between femoral head zone 2–4 modified Mankin score and acetabulum zone 1, 7 & 8 modified Mankin score identified for control limbs (solid lines --------), between operated limb femoral head zones 3–6 and corresponding acetabulum zone 8 (dotted lines ……), and between zones 3–5 on operated femoral head (dashed lines - - - - -). The region of debrided cartilage on operated femoral head is delineated by dashed lines/dots in zones 3–5. d Modified Mankin scores by femoral head and acetabulum regional zone for control and operated limbs. *Operated different from control
Fig. 6a Regional synovitis score for control and operated limbs. *p = 0.05 for control vs. operated. No individual region effect. b Representative histological images (H&E) of synovium from cranial, caudal, lateral and medial aspects of the hip joint in control and operated limbs. Scale bar = 100 μm
Spearman rank order correlations related to the operated limb at experimental end-point between various biologically relevant clinical and end-point measures (p < 0.05), at either 0 or 20 weeks, or the difference in operated limb over time, or between operated and control hind limb
| Clinical factor | Clinical or | ρ |
|---|---|---|
| Change in bodyweight 0–20 weeks |
| −0.82– −0.79 |
| Change in bodyweight 0–20 weeks | Range of motion operated limb at 20 weeks | 0.89 |
| Range of motion operated limb at 20 weeks |
| −0.96– −0.93 |
| Range of motion operated limb at 20 weeks | Maximum peak pressure, force and impulse O:C at 20 weeks | 0.82–0.89 |
| Range of motion operated limb at 20 weeks | Impulse O:C 20 weeks | 0.82 |
| Difference in range of motion between operated and control 20 weeks |
| −0.93 |
| Difference in range of motion between operated and control 20 weeks | Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 20 weeks | 0.89 |
| Limb circumference operated limb |
| −0.86 |
| Limb circumference operated limb |
| 0.79 |
| CBPI 20 weeks | Bodyweight distribution change hind limbs 0–20 weeks | −0.77 |
| CBPI 20 weeks | Bodyweight distribution change forelimbs 0–20 weeks | 0.77 |
| CBPI 20 weeks | Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 20 weeks | −0.85 |
| Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 20 weeks |
| −0.82 |
| Bodyweight distribution change operated 0–20 weeks |
| −0.93 |
| Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 20 weeks |
| 0.79–0.90 |
| Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 20 weeks | Bodyweight distribution to operated limb at 0 weeks | 0.86 |
| Bodyweight distribution change operated 0–20 weeks | Impulse O:C at 20 weeks | 0.79 |
| Maximum force O:C 20 weeks |
| −0.86– −0.79 |
| Maximum force O:C 20 weeks |
| −0.83 |
| Maximum force O:C 20 weeks | Impulse O:C 20 weeks | 0.96 |
| Maximum peak pressure O:C 20 weeks |
| −0.96– −0.93 |
| Radiographic score operated 20 weeks |
| 0.77–0.79 |
| Compression index operated 20 weeks |
| 0.82 |
| Compression index operated 20 weeks | Distraction index operated 20 weeks | 0.86 |
| Compression index operated 20 weeks | Radiographic score operated 20 weeks | 0.77 |
| Compression index operated 20 weeks | Mean number night activity bouts 20 weeks | −0.79 |
| Distraction index operated 20 weeks | Radiographic score operated 0 weeks | 0.94 |
Notes: CBPI canine brief pain inventory, O:C operated vs. control