| Literature DB >> 29859366 |
Isabelle Denry1, Ourania-Menti Goudouri2, Douglas C Fredericks3, Adil Akkouch2, Michael R Acevedo4, Julie A Holloway5.
Abstract
There is increasing interest in biodegradable ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering capable of in situ delivery of ionic species favoring bone formation. Strontium has been shown to be osteogenic, but strontium-containing drugs such as strontium ranelate, used in Europe for the treatment of osteoporosis, are now restricted due to clinical evidence of systemic effects. By doping fluorapatite-based glasses with strontium, we developed ceramic scaffolds with fully interconnected macroporosity and cell size similar to that of cancellous bone, that are also capable of releasing strontium. The crystallization behavior, investigated by XRD and SEM, revealed the formation of akermanite and fluorapatite at the surface of strontium-free glass-ceramic scaffolds, and strontium-substituted fluorapatite at the surface of the strontium-doped scaffolds. At 8 weeks after implantation in a rat calvarial critical size defect, scaffolds doped with the highest amount of strontium led to the highest mineral apposition rate. A significantly higher amount of newly-formed bone was found with the strontium-free glass-ceramic scaffold, and possibly linked to the presence of akermanite at the scaffold surface. We demonstrate by energy dispersive XRF analyses of skull sections that strontium was present in newly formed bone with the strontium-doped scaffolds, while a significant amount of fluorine was incorporated in newly formed bone, regardless of composition or crystallization state. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: The present work demonstrates the in vivo action of strontium-containing glass-ceramic scaffolds. These bone graft substitutes are targeted at non load-bearing bone defects. Results show that strontium is successfully incorporated in newly formed bone. This is associated with a significantly higher Mineral Apposition Rate. The benefits of in situ release of strontium are demonstrated. The broader scientific impact of this works builds on the concept of resorbable ceramic scaffolds as reservoirs of ionic species capable of enhancing bone regeneration.Entities:
Keywords: Akermanite; Fluorapatite; Osteogenesis; Scaffold; Strontium
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29859366 PMCID: PMC6119524 DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2018.05.047
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Biomater ISSN: 1742-7061 Impact factor: 8.947
Chemical composition of the glasses prepared (mol%).
| GSr-0 | GSr-12 | GSr-24 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SiO2 | 31.5 | 31.5 | 31.5 |
| MgO | 21.2 | 21.2 | 21.2 |
| Nb2O5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| CaO | 24.0 | 12.0 | 0.0 |
| Na2O | 2.3 | 2.3 | 2.3 |
| K2O | 3.8 | 3.8 | 3.8 |
| Al2O3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| CaF2 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 11.2 |
| P2O5 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 |
Fig. 1Scanning electron micrographs of various scaffolds. A and E: GSr-0, arrow indicates fluorapatite crystal; B and F: GCSr-0, arrow indicates akermanite crystal; C and G: GCSr-12, arrow indicates Sr-fluorapatite platelet; D and H: GCSr-24, arrow indicates Sr-fluorapatite platelet; I through L: scanning electron micrographs of polished and etched specimens showing underlying microstructure (I: GSr-0; J: GCSr-0; K: GCSr-12; L: GCSr-24).
Architectural characteristics, mean compressive strength and in vivo response for the various experimental groups (NA: not applicable).
| Group | GSr-0 | GCSr-0 | GCSr-12 | GCSr-24 | Control |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strut diameter (µm) | 187 ± 52a | 192 ± 26a | 281 ± 45b | 263 ± 77b | NA |
| Pore diameter (µm) | 496 ± 133a | 502 ± 92a | 551 ± 116a | 540 ± 144a | NA |
| Strut density (g/cm3) | 2.927 ± 0.008 | 2.923 ± 0.017 | 3.188 ± 0.005 | 3.353 ± 0.021 | NA |
| Porosity (%) – (SEM) | 73.4 ± 3.8a | 76.1 ± 2.9ab | 79.1 ± 3.3b | 85.3 ± 1.2c | NA |
| Porosity (%) – (micro-CT) | 61.8 ± 7.5a | 66.9 ± 6.1ab | 74.6 ± 0.6bc | 80.5 ± 2.0c | NA |
| Compressive strength (MPa) | 1.52 ± 0.55a | 1.72 ± 0.61a | 0.83 ± 0.37b | 0.32 ± 0.06b | NA |
| Mineral Apposition Rate (µm/day) | 5.7 ± 2.2ab | 6.3 ± 2.2bc | 6.9 ± 2.3bc | 9.2 ± 3.7c | 2.3 ± 0.4a |
| New bone formation (%) (2D histological sections) | 10.7 ± 5.9a | 22.3 ± 6.7a | 20.3 ± 12.6a | 22.0 ± 15.7a | NA |
| Percent bone volume BV/TV (%) (mirco-CT) | 23.4 ± 4.5b | 38.5 ± 10.9c | 24.8 ± 7.1b | 32.5 ± 7.2bc | 3.5 ± 2.3a |
Identical letters denote not statistically significant differences (p > 0.05).
Fig. 2X-ray diffraction patterns of powdered scaffolds (A: GSr-0; B: GCSr-0; C: GCSr-12; D: GCSr-24).
Fig. 3Grazing incidence x-ray diffraction patterns of sintered glass and glass-ceramic pellet surfaces (A: GSr-0; B: GCSr-0; C: GCSr-12; D: GCSr-24).
Fig. 4Representative histological skull sections. A1 through E1: calcein label; A2 through E2: alizarin red label; A3 through E3: combined labeling; A4 through E4: bright field image; A5 through E5: Stevenel’s blue-van Gieson picrofuschin staining. (Bar: 1 mm).
Fig. 5Representative micrograph of histological skull section showing both fluorochromes labels for GCSr-24. (bar: 100 µm).
Fig. 6Representative 3D (left) and 2D (right) x-ray microscopy images of hemisectioned scaffolds after 8 weeks in vivo. A: negative control; B: GSr-0; C: GCSr-0; D: GCSr-12; E: GCSr-24.
Fig. 7Summary of EDS XRF analyses of skull sections at 8 weeks. A: GSr-0; B: GCSr-0; C: GCSr-12; D: GCSr-24; E: representative skull section showing scaffold (S) and new bone (NB); F: higher magnification showing glass-ceramic scaffold strut surrounded by biodegradation zone (arrows).