| Literature DB >> 29088267 |
Mollie A Heffner1, Damian C Genetos2, Blaine A Christiansen3.
Abstract
Underlying mechanisms contributing to the imbalance in bone turnover during <span class="Disease">osteoporosis remain only partially explained. Reduced sensory nerve function may contribute to this imbalance, as sensory neuropeptides affect the activity of osteoblasts and osteoclasts in vivo, especially during bone adaptation. In this study, we investigated bone adaptation in <span class="Species">mice following two weeks of tibial compression (peak magnitude 3 N or 7 N). To induce decreased sensory nerve function, mice were treated with capsaicin as neonates. We hypothesized that decreased sensory nerve function would diminish the adaptation of bone to mechanical loading, assessed with μCT and dynamic histomorphometry. We found that tibial compression induced significant changes in cortical microarchitecture that depended on compression magnitude and location along the length of the tibia; in contrast, there was no effect of loading on trabecular bone of the tibial metaphysis. Tibial compression significantly increased periosteal, and decreased endosteal, bone formation. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, capsaicin-treated mice generally displayed a similar, if not larger, adaptive response to mechanical loading, including greater increases in bone mineral content and mineral apposition rate. To integrate mechanical loading of bone with sensory nerve activation, we examined whether concentration of the neuropeptides calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and substance P (SP) in bone were affected following 1 or 5 days of 5 N tibial compression or hindlimb unloading. We found that 1 day of tibial compression significantly increased CGRP concentrations in bone, and hindlimb unloading also exhibited a trend toward increased CGRP in bone. These results may suggest a role of sensory nerves in the bone adaptation response to the mechanical environment, though this remains unclear.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29088267 PMCID: PMC5663494 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187354
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Schematic of experimental design.
Fig 2Regions of interest for analysis of trabecular and cortical bone.
MicroCT analysis of trabecular bone was performed at the proximal tibial metaphysis. Cortical bone analysis was performed using μCT and dynamic histomorphometry at 5 locations along the length of the tibias.
Fig 3Body weights of mice during tibial compression or hindlimb unloading.
(A) Body weights of capsaicin- and vehicle-treated mice subjected to tibial compression at 3 N or 7 N. (B) Body weights of mice subjected to 5 N tibial compression or hindlimb unloading. Groups not connected by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Fig 4Maximum bone strain during tibial compression at the anteromedial tibial surface.
(A) A diagrammatic representation shows the approximate location of the strain gauge (a). (B) Maximum bone strain measured during tibial compression at compressive magnitudes from 1–7 N. No significant differences in measured strain were observed between capsaicin- and vehicle-treated mice at any of the compressive forces tested.
Fig 5Hot-plate test of thermal analgesia.
Hot-plate analgesia testing of vehicle- and capsaicin-treated mice was performed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks of age to verify decreased peripheral sensory nerve function prior to tibial compression. Capsaicin-treated mice exhibited significantly longer latency times than vehicle-treated mice at all time points when exposed to a constant 55°C thermal stimulus, indicating decreased thermal sensitivity. * indicates significant differences between capsaicin- and vehicle-treated mice (p < 0.05).
Trabecular bone parameters assessed at the tibial metaphysis using microCT.
| Treatment Group | BV/TV | Tb.Th | Tb.N | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Loaded | Control | Loaded | Control | Loaded | |
| 0.107±0.013 | 0.110±0.011 | 0.0440±0.0016 | 0.0451±0.0022 | 4.28±0.244 | 4.25±0.164 | |
| 0.105±0.007 | 0.108±0.003 | 0.0421±0.0017 | 0.0422±0.0020 | 4.35±0.163 | 4.40±0.135 | |
| 0.119±0.011 | 0.112±0.014 | 0.0449±0.0028 | 0.0503±0.0029 | 4.20±0.242 | 3.89±0.223 | |
| 0.127±0.008 | 0.129±0.017 | 0.0430±0.0014 | 0.0471±0.0031 | 4.51±0.280 | 4.30±0.351 | |
Data reported as mean±SD.
Fig 6Micro-computed tomography analysis of cortical bone changes.
Significant changes in cortical bone microstructure were identified at different locations along the length of the tibias after two weeks of 7 N tibial compression. Diamonds represent the average change of loaded compared to control tibias with error bars indicating standard deviation. (A) Total cross-sectional area (Tt.Ar) was significantly increased in loaded tibias at all locations except 30%. (B) Changes in cortical bone area (Ct.Ar) mirrored changes in Tt.Ar. (C) Cortical thickness (Ct.Th) decreased at more proximal locations along the tibia. (D) Bone mineral content (BMC) was significantly altered by tibial compression and varied by location on the tibia. V: loading caused a significant increase in vehicle-treated mice, p<0.05. C: loading caused a significant increase in capsaicin-treated mice, p<0.05. *: the response was significantly different between vehicle- and capsaicin-treated mice.
Cortical bone parameters assessed along control and loaded tibias using microCT.
| Tibial Location | Treatment Group | Total area | Medullary area | Bone mineral content | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Loaded | Control | Loaded | Control | Loaded | ||
| 2.82±0.18 | 2.97±0.28 | 1.91±0.17 | 2.02±0.24 | 0.60±0.03 | 0.63±0.04 | ||
| 2.65±0.15 | 2.67±0.16 | 1.79±0.13 | 1.80±0.11 | 0.60±0.04 | 0.57±0.05 | ||
| 1.67±0.14 | 1.70±0.11 | 0.84±0.12 | 0.85±0.02 | 0.53±0.02 | 0.55±0.03 | ||
| 1.57±0.06 | 1.56±0.05 | 0.78±0.05 | 0.77±0.04 | 0.50±0.02 | 0.51±0.02 | ||
| 1.40±0.09 | 1.39±0.06 | 0.66±0.06 | 0.65±0.05 | 0.49±0.03 | 0.49±0.02 | ||
| 1.31±0.04 | 1.30±0.05 | 0.61±0.02 | 0.61±0.03 | 0.46±0.02 | 0.46±0.02 | ||
| 1.22±0.08 | 1.22±0.06 | 0.54±0.04 | 0.54±0.03 | 0.45±0.03 | 0.46±0.02 | ||
| 1.15±0.06 | 1.15±0.05 | 0.51±0.03 | 0.50±0.02 | 0.43±0.02 | 0.43±0.02 | ||
| 0.94±0.05 | 0.92±0.06 | 0.37±0.03 | 0.36±0.04 | 0.40±0.02 | 0.39±0.02 | ||
| 0.89±0.06 | 0.87±0.04 | 0.35±0.03 | 0.34±0.03 | 0.37±0.02 | 0.37±0.02 | ||
| 3.04±0.10 | 3.41±0.14 | 2.03±0.09 | 2.27±0.12 | 0.65±0.03 | 0.73±0.04 | ||
| 2.79±0.18 | 3.33±0.12 | 1.85±0.13 | 2.17±0.10 | 0.60±0.04 | 0.75±0.04 | ||
| 1.81±0.07 | 1.87±0.08 | 0.90±0.07 | 0.96±0.06 | 0.58±0.03 | 0.57±0.02 | ||
| 1.67±0.06 | 1.82±0.06 | 0.81±0.04 | 0.90±0.06 | 0.54±0.03 | 0.58±0.02 | ||
| 1.52±0.04 | 1.57±0.06 | 0.72±0.04 | 0.74±0.04 | 0.53±0.02 | 0.54±0.02 | ||
| 1.42±0.09 | 1.51±0.05 | 0.64±0.05 | 0.68±0.04 | 0.51±0.03 | 0.54±0.01 | ||
| 1.30±0.04 | 1.40±0.05 | 0.58±0.03 | 0.61±0.03 | 0.49±0.02 | 0.53±0.03 | ||
| 1.22±0.06 | 1.33±0.06 | 0.52±0.03 | 0.54±0.03 | 0.47±0.03 | 0.53±0.03 | ||
| 1.00±0.03 | 1.08±0.06 | 0.39±0.02 | 0.41±0.03 | 0.43±0.01 | 0.47±0.03 | ||
| 0.95±0.06 | 1.01±0.05 | 0.36±0.03 | 0.37±0.03 | 0.41±0.02 | 0.45±0.02 | ||
Data reported as mean±SD
a: significant leg*VOI interaction, 7N compressive force
b: significant treatment*leg*VOI interaction, 7N compressive force
c: significant leg*VOI interaction, 3N compressive force
*: significant difference between control and loaded, p<0.05
**:significant difference between capsaicin and vehicle response, p<0.05
Bone formation parameters assessed using dynamic histomorphometry.
| 2.05±0.03 | 1.62±0.01 | 62±1 | 53±5 | 1.28±0.03 | 0.85±0.08 | ||
| 1.96±0.04 | 1.71±0.02 | 65±2 | 50±3 | 1.27±0.05 | 0.85±0.05 | ||
| 1.30±0.01 | 0.98±0.03 | 51±3 | 30±3 | 0.66±0.03 | 0.30±0.03 | ||
| 1.59±0.05 | 0.99±0.03 | 49±5 | 26±3 | 0.77±0.07 | 0.25±0.03 | ||
| 1.11±0.01 | 0.97±0.02 | 53±8 | 40±2 | 0.59±0.09 | 0.39±0.03 | ||
| 1.25±0.02 | 0.85±0.03 | 51±4 | 36±2 | 0.64±0.05 | 0.31±0.03 | ||
| 1.07±0.02 | 1.07±0.02 | 49±6 | 39±1 | 0.53±0.07 | 0.41±0.02 | ||
| 0.79±0.03 | 0.98±0.03 | 38±2 | 33±4 | 0.30±0.02 | 0.33±0.04 | ||
| 1.01±0.03 | 1.11±0.02 | 36±6 | 37±4 | 0.37±0.06 | 0.41±0.04 | ||
| 0.66±0.02 | 0.90±0.09 | 26±2 | 37±6 | 0.17±0.01 | 0.33±0.08 | ||
| 0.91±0.01 | 1.82±0.02 | 10±1 | 29±3 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.52±0.05 | ||
| 1.02±0.02 | 2.09±0.03 | 12±0 | 33±2 | 0.13±0.01 | 0.70±0.05 | ||
| 1.53±0.02 | 1.95±0.02 | 19±2 | 43±4 | 0.29±0.03 | 0.85±0.08 | ||
| 1.06±0.02 | 1.77±0.02 | 15±1 | 47±3 | 0.16±0.01 | 0.82±0.05 | ||
| 0.75±0.03 | 1.11±0.02 | 10±1 | 41±2 | 0.07±0.01 | 0.46±0.02 | ||
| 0.82±0.03 | 1.29±0.03 | 10±1 | 44±7 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.56±0.09 | ||
| 0.87±0.02 | 1.49±0.02 | 11±1 | 52±5 | 0.10±0.01 | 0.77±0.08 | ||
| 0.82±0.04 | 1.39±0.10 | 14±1 | 53±8 | 0.11±0.01 | 0.74±0.14 | ||
| 0.77±0.02 | 1.11±0.04 | 14±4 | 52±5 | 0.11±0.03 | 0.58±0.07 | ||
| 0.55±0.03 | 1.14±0.03 | 17±1 | 60±11 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.69±0.13 | ||
Data reported as mean±SD
a: significant leg*VOI interaction, 7N compressive force
b: significant treatment*leg*VOI interaction, 7N compressive force
*: significant difference between control and loaded, p<0.05
**:significant difference between capsaicin and vehicle response, p<0.05
Fig 7Dynamic histomorphometric analysis of bone formation in capsaicin- and vehicle-treated mice.
Mineral apposition rate (MAR), percent mineralizing surface (MS/BS), and bone formation rate (BFR/BS) were quantified for the endosteal (A) and periosteal surfaces (B) in mice loaded with tibial compression at 7 N magnitude. Fluorescent images (C) show cortical bone from the control and loaded tibias of a vehicle-treated mouse. V: loading caused a significant difference in tibias of vehicle-treated mice, p<0.05. C: loading caused a significant difference in tibias of capsaicin-treated mice, p<0.05. *: the response was significantly different between vehicle- and capsaicin-treated mice.
Fig 8Neuropeptide concentrations in bones of mice subjected to tibial compression or hindlimb unloading.
(A) CGRP concentration in the bones of mice subjected to tibial compression or hindlimb unloading. Main effects of time point and type of stimulus (tibial compression or hindlimb unloading) were observed, and a significant increase in CGRP concentration was observed following 1 day of tibial compression. (B) SP concentration in the bones of mice subjected to tibial compression or hindlimb unloading. A significant main effect type of stimulus was observed, but no significant differences were observed between any experimental groups.