| Literature DB >> 27766028 |
Zi-Hui Yang1, Bao-Lei Wu1, Chen Ye2, Sen Jia1, Xin-Jie Yang1, Rui Hou1, De-Lin Lei1, Lei Wang3.
Abstract
Distraction osteogenesis (DO) is a widely used self-tissue engineering. However, complications and discomfort due to the long treatment period are still the bottleneck of DO. Novel strategies to accelerate bone formation in DO are still needed. P38 is capable of regulating the osteogenic differentiation of both mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and osteoblasts, which are crucial to bone regeneration. However, it is not clear whether targeting p38 could regulate bony formation in DO. The purpose of the current work was to investigate the effects of local application of either p38 agonist anisomycin or p38 inhibitor SB203580 in a rat model of DO. 30 adult rats were randomly divided into 3 groups: (A) rats injected with DMSO served as the control group; (B) rats injected with p38 agonist anisomycin; (C) rats injected with p38 inhibitor SB203580. All the rats were subjected to mandibular distraction and the injection was performed daily during this period. The distracted mandibles were harvested on days 15 and 30 after surgery and subjected to the following analysis. Micro-computed tomography and histological evaluation results showed that local application of p38 agonist anisomycin increased new bone formation in DO, whereas p38 inhibitor SB203580 decreased it. Immunohistochemical analysis suggested that anisomycin promoted MSC recruitment in the distraction gap. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that local application of p38 agonist anisomycin can increase new bone formation during DO. This study may lead to a novel cell-based strategy for the improvement of bone regeneration.Entities:
Keywords: anisomycin.; distraction osteogenesis; mandible; mesenchymal stem cell; p38 signaling
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27766028 PMCID: PMC5069414 DOI: 10.7150/ijms.16663
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Med Sci ISSN: 1449-1907 Impact factor: 3.738
Figure 2Gross view of mandibles on day 15 and 30 post surgery. Distracted mandibles were harvested on day 15 and 30 respectively. No sign of inflammation was shown in each group.
Figure 3MicroCT evaluation of each group. (A) Images of mandibles (B) Bone mineral density (BMD) analysis. (C) The ratio of bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) analysis.
Figure 4Histology and histomorphometric analysis of each group. (A) HE photographs of day 15 and day 30. (B) Trabecular bone volume/ total volume analysis. Images were taken in 5 randomly selected high magnification fields (200×) per slide under a microscope. The new bone formation in the distraction gap was quantified with the ratio of trabecular bone volume/total volume using Image Pro-Plus analysis software by an experienced pathologist. Bar = 50 μm.
Figure 5Nestin immunohistochemistry analysis of each group. (A) Nestin staining photographs of each group on day 15 and 30. (B) Nestin + cell analysis. Images were photographed in 5 randomly selected fields (400×) per slide. The Nestin+ cells were counted manually by an experienced pathologist. All the experiments were conducted in triplicate. Bar = 50 μm.