Aaron M Stoker1,2, James P Stannard1,2, Keiichi Kuroki2, Chantelle C Bozynski1,2, Ferris M Pfeiffer1,2,3, James L Cook1,2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Missouri Orthopaedic Institute, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. 2. Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopaedics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. 3. Department of Bioengineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fresh osteochondral allografts (OCAs) are limited in availability. The Missouri Osteochondral Allograft Preservation System (MOPS) has been reported to effectively preserve OCAs twice as long as current tissue bank protocols in preclinical studies. HYPOTHESIS: The viable chondrocyte density (VCD) in OCAs preserved for up to 70 days using the MOPS will not be significantly different from day 0, and the VCD in MOPS-preserved OCAs will be significantly higher than for standard tissue bank preservation. Media changes during preservation will significantly improve the VCD. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Femoral condyles harvested from qualified donors (n = 12) were quartered (n = 48), assigned to 1 of 4 treatment groups (tissue bank protocol at 4°C or MOPS at 25°C, with or without media changes), and preserved for 0, 28, 56, or 70 days and assessed for the VCD and histopathological characteristics. In addition, osteochondral explants were created from the femoral condyles of 12 donors (n = 36 explants), assigned to the same groups and time points, and tested for biomechanical properties. RESULTS: MOPS-preserved OCAs maintained the day 0 VCD through 56 days. OCAs stored using current tissue bank protocols had a significantly lower VCD compared with day 0 and the MOPS by day 28. OCA histological and biomechanical properties did not significantly change from day 0 for any group. CONCLUSION: The MOPS preserved essential OCA viability and quality at significantly higher levels than current tissue bank protocols for at least 56 days after procurement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Improving the viability and duration of OCA preservation provides potential benefits to tissue banks, donor families, surgeons, and patients with respect to tissue use, financial costs, and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Fresh osteochondral allografts (OCAs) are limited in availability. The Missouri Osteochondral Allograft Preservation System (MOPS) has been reported to effectively preserve OCAs twice as long as current tissue bank protocols in preclinical studies. HYPOTHESIS: The viable chondrocyte density (VCD) in OCAs preserved for up to 70 days using the MOPS will not be significantly different from day 0, and the VCD in MOPS-preserved OCAs will be significantly higher than for standard tissue bank preservation. Media changes during preservation will significantly improve the VCD. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Femoral condyles harvested from qualified donors (n = 12) were quartered (n = 48), assigned to 1 of 4 treatment groups (tissue bank protocol at 4°C or MOPS at 25°C, with or without media changes), and preserved for 0, 28, 56, or 70 days and assessed for the VCD and histopathological characteristics. In addition, osteochondral explants were created from the femoral condyles of 12 donors (n = 36 explants), assigned to the same groups and time points, and tested for biomechanical properties. RESULTS: MOPS-preserved OCAs maintained the day 0 VCD through 56 days. OCAs stored using current tissue bank protocols had a significantly lower VCD compared with day 0 and the MOPS by day 28. OCA histological and biomechanical properties did not significantly change from day 0 for any group. CONCLUSION: The MOPS preserved essential OCA viability and quality at significantly higher levels than current tissue bank protocols for at least 56 days after procurement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Improving the viability and duration of OCA preservation provides potential benefits to tissue banks, donor families, surgeons, and patients with respect to tissue use, financial costs, and outcomes.
Authors: G R Meloni; A Farran; B Mohanraj; H Guehring; R Cocca; E Rabut; R L Mauck; G R Dodge Journal: Eur Cell Mater Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 3.942
Authors: James L Cook; James P Stannard; Aaron M Stoker; Kylee Rucinski; Brett D Crist; Cristi R Cook; Cory Crecelius; Matthew J Smith; Renee Stucky Journal: Mo Med Date: 2022 Mar-Apr
Authors: Janet M Denbeigh; Mario Hevesi; Carlo A Paggi; Zachary T Resch; Leila Bagheri; Kristin Mara; Arvin Arani; Chenghao Zhang; A Noelle Larson; Daniel B F Saris; Aaron J Krych; Andre J van Wijnen Journal: Cartilage Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Christina C De Armond; Stanley E Kim; Daniel D Lewis; Adam H Biedryzcki; Scott A Banks; James L Cook; Justin D Keister Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Samuel P Franklin; Aaron M Stoker; Sean M Murphy; Michael P Kowaleski; Mitchell Gillick; Stanley E Kim; Michael Karlin; Alan Cross; James L Cook Journal: Front Vet Sci Date: 2021-12-24
Authors: Mario Hevesi; Janet M Denbeigh; Carlo A Paggi; Catalina Galeano-Garces; Leila Bagheri; A Noelle Larson; Michael J Stuart; Daniel B F Saris; Andre J van Wijnen; Aaron J Krych Journal: Cartilage Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.117