Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat
Large bone defects often pose major difficulties in orthopaedic surgery. The application of long‐term cultured stem cells combined with a scaffold lead to a significant improvement of bone healing in recent experiments but is strongly restricted by European Union law. Bone marrow mononuclear cells (...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine 2018-03, Vol.12 (3), p.653-666 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 666 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 653 |
container_title | Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Janko, Maren Sahm, Julian Schaible, Alexander Brune, Jan C. Bellen, Marlene Schroder, Katrin Seebach, Caroline Marzi, Ingo Henrich, Dirk |
description | Large bone defects often pose major difficulties in orthopaedic surgery. The application of long‐term cultured stem cells combined with a scaffold lead to a significant improvement of bone healing in recent experiments but is strongly restricted by European Union law. Bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMC), however, can be isolated and transplanted within a few hours and have been proven effective in experimental models of bone healing. The effectivity of the BMC‐supported therapy might be influenced by the type of scaffold. Hence, we compared three different scaffolds serving as a carrier for BMC in a rat femoral critical size defect with regard to the osteogenic activity in the defect zone. Human demineralized bone matrix (DBM), bovine cancellous bone hydroxyapatite ceramic (BS), or β‐tricalcium phosphate (β‐TCP) were seeded with human BMC and hereafter implanted into critically sized bone defects of male athymic nude rats. Autologous bone served as a control. Gene activity was measured after 1 week, and bone formation was analysed histologically and radiologically after 8 weeks. Generally, regenerative gene expression (BMP2, RUNX2, VEGF, SDF‐1, and RANKL) as well as bony bridging and callus formation was observed to be most pronounced in defects filled with autologous bone, followed in descending order by DBM, β‐TCP, and BS. Although DBM was superior in most aspects of bone regeneration analysed in comparison to β‐TCP and BS, the level of autologous bone could not be attained. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/term.2484 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1903165979</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1903165979</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3884-28553f620b32adc5bc1d0f0d5bbc8626b55a7839abe84c95783561a00f99775c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU2P1SAUhhujcT504R8wJG50cWcoLZQuzc3omIwxMeOaUHqwTPioQHNz52f5C6X26sLEFSfw8HAOb1W9qvFVjTG5zhDdFWl5-6Q6r_uG7DqM6dNTzQhtz6qLlB7KJmW0eV6dEU5bTlp2Xv3cBzfLaFLwKGiUpwiARqM1RPAZ5eMMaT1ISmod7JjQHCEBjDCig8kTmhYnPRqCB-RkjOGAXPDBL8qCjEiBteW-L2LYoAmkNf47Mh5JpMGFKC1S0WSjSpHMY3keNKhcPCPYrSlAMk9HZxSKMr-onmlpE7w8rZfVtw839_vb3d2Xj5_27-92quG83ZUZaaMZwUND5KjooOoRazzSYVCcETZQKjve9HIA3qqelpqyWmKs-77rqGouq7ebd47hxwIpC2fSOpD0EJYk6h43NaN91xf0zT_oQ1iiL90JgmvSY45ZW6h3G6ViSCmCFnM05dOOosZiDVKsQYo1yMK-PhmXwcH4l_yTXAGuN-BgLBz_bxL3N18__1b-Au0QqqQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2012908064</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Janko, Maren ; Sahm, Julian ; Schaible, Alexander ; Brune, Jan C. ; Bellen, Marlene ; Schroder, Katrin ; Seebach, Caroline ; Marzi, Ingo ; Henrich, Dirk</creator><creatorcontrib>Janko, Maren ; Sahm, Julian ; Schaible, Alexander ; Brune, Jan C. ; Bellen, Marlene ; Schroder, Katrin ; Seebach, Caroline ; Marzi, Ingo ; Henrich, Dirk</creatorcontrib><description>Large bone defects often pose major difficulties in orthopaedic surgery. The application of long‐term cultured stem cells combined with a scaffold lead to a significant improvement of bone healing in recent experiments but is strongly restricted by European Union law. Bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMC), however, can be isolated and transplanted within a few hours and have been proven effective in experimental models of bone healing. The effectivity of the BMC‐supported therapy might be influenced by the type of scaffold. Hence, we compared three different scaffolds serving as a carrier for BMC in a rat femoral critical size defect with regard to the osteogenic activity in the defect zone. Human demineralized bone matrix (DBM), bovine cancellous bone hydroxyapatite ceramic (BS), or β‐tricalcium phosphate (β‐TCP) were seeded with human BMC and hereafter implanted into critically sized bone defects of male athymic nude rats. Autologous bone served as a control. Gene activity was measured after 1 week, and bone formation was analysed histologically and radiologically after 8 weeks. Generally, regenerative gene expression (BMP2, RUNX2, VEGF, SDF‐1, and RANKL) as well as bony bridging and callus formation was observed to be most pronounced in defects filled with autologous bone, followed in descending order by DBM, β‐TCP, and BS. Although DBM was superior in most aspects of bone regeneration analysed in comparison to β‐TCP and BS, the level of autologous bone could not be attained.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6254</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-7005</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/term.2484</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28548246</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Hindawi Limited</publisher><subject>Animal models ; athymic rat ; Autografts ; beta tricalcium phosphate ; Biocompatibility ; Biomedical materials ; Bone growth ; Bone healing ; Bone marrow ; bone marrow mononuclear cells ; Bone marrow transplantation ; Bone matrix ; Bone morphogenetic protein 2 ; Bone surgery ; Calcium phosphates ; Callus ; Cancellous bone ; Cbfa-1 protein ; Defects ; demineralized bone matrix ; Demineralizing ; experimental study ; Femur ; Gene expression ; Healing ; Hydroxyapatite ; large bone defect ; Leukocytes (mononuclear) ; Osteogenesis ; Rats ; Regeneration ; Regeneration (physiology) ; Regenerative medicine ; Scaffolds ; Stem cell transplantation ; Stem cells ; Surgical implants ; Tissue engineering ; TRANCE protein ; Tricalcium phosphate ; Vascular endothelial growth factor</subject><ispartof>Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2018-03, Vol.12 (3), p.653-666</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3884-28553f620b32adc5bc1d0f0d5bbc8626b55a7839abe84c95783561a00f99775c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3884-28553f620b32adc5bc1d0f0d5bbc8626b55a7839abe84c95783561a00f99775c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6746-3400</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fterm.2484$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fterm.2484$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28548246$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Janko, Maren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahm, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaible, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brune, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellen, Marlene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schroder, Katrin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seebach, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marzi, Ingo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henrich, Dirk</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat</title><title>Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine</title><addtitle>J Tissue Eng Regen Med</addtitle><description>Large bone defects often pose major difficulties in orthopaedic surgery. The application of long‐term cultured stem cells combined with a scaffold lead to a significant improvement of bone healing in recent experiments but is strongly restricted by European Union law. Bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMC), however, can be isolated and transplanted within a few hours and have been proven effective in experimental models of bone healing. The effectivity of the BMC‐supported therapy might be influenced by the type of scaffold. Hence, we compared three different scaffolds serving as a carrier for BMC in a rat femoral critical size defect with regard to the osteogenic activity in the defect zone. Human demineralized bone matrix (DBM), bovine cancellous bone hydroxyapatite ceramic (BS), or β‐tricalcium phosphate (β‐TCP) were seeded with human BMC and hereafter implanted into critically sized bone defects of male athymic nude rats. Autologous bone served as a control. Gene activity was measured after 1 week, and bone formation was analysed histologically and radiologically after 8 weeks. Generally, regenerative gene expression (BMP2, RUNX2, VEGF, SDF‐1, and RANKL) as well as bony bridging and callus formation was observed to be most pronounced in defects filled with autologous bone, followed in descending order by DBM, β‐TCP, and BS. Although DBM was superior in most aspects of bone regeneration analysed in comparison to β‐TCP and BS, the level of autologous bone could not be attained.</description><subject>Animal models</subject><subject>athymic rat</subject><subject>Autografts</subject><subject>beta tricalcium phosphate</subject><subject>Biocompatibility</subject><subject>Biomedical materials</subject><subject>Bone growth</subject><subject>Bone healing</subject><subject>Bone marrow</subject><subject>bone marrow mononuclear cells</subject><subject>Bone marrow transplantation</subject><subject>Bone matrix</subject><subject>Bone morphogenetic protein 2</subject><subject>Bone surgery</subject><subject>Calcium phosphates</subject><subject>Callus</subject><subject>Cancellous bone</subject><subject>Cbfa-1 protein</subject><subject>Defects</subject><subject>demineralized bone matrix</subject><subject>Demineralizing</subject><subject>experimental study</subject><subject>Femur</subject><subject>Gene expression</subject><subject>Healing</subject><subject>Hydroxyapatite</subject><subject>large bone defect</subject><subject>Leukocytes (mononuclear)</subject><subject>Osteogenesis</subject><subject>Rats</subject><subject>Regeneration</subject><subject>Regeneration (physiology)</subject><subject>Regenerative medicine</subject><subject>Scaffolds</subject><subject>Stem cell transplantation</subject><subject>Stem cells</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Tissue engineering</subject><subject>TRANCE protein</subject><subject>Tricalcium phosphate</subject><subject>Vascular endothelial growth factor</subject><issn>1932-6254</issn><issn>1932-7005</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kU2P1SAUhhujcT504R8wJG50cWcoLZQuzc3omIwxMeOaUHqwTPioQHNz52f5C6X26sLEFSfw8HAOb1W9qvFVjTG5zhDdFWl5-6Q6r_uG7DqM6dNTzQhtz6qLlB7KJmW0eV6dEU5bTlp2Xv3cBzfLaFLwKGiUpwiARqM1RPAZ5eMMaT1ISmod7JjQHCEBjDCig8kTmhYnPRqCB-RkjOGAXPDBL8qCjEiBteW-L2LYoAmkNf47Mh5JpMGFKC1S0WSjSpHMY3keNKhcPCPYrSlAMk9HZxSKMr-onmlpE7w8rZfVtw839_vb3d2Xj5_27-92quG83ZUZaaMZwUND5KjooOoRazzSYVCcETZQKjve9HIA3qqelpqyWmKs-77rqGouq7ebd47hxwIpC2fSOpD0EJYk6h43NaN91xf0zT_oQ1iiL90JgmvSY45ZW6h3G6ViSCmCFnM05dOOosZiDVKsQYo1yMK-PhmXwcH4l_yTXAGuN-BgLBz_bxL3N18__1b-Au0QqqQ</recordid><startdate>201803</startdate><enddate>201803</enddate><creator>Janko, Maren</creator><creator>Sahm, Julian</creator><creator>Schaible, Alexander</creator><creator>Brune, Jan C.</creator><creator>Bellen, Marlene</creator><creator>Schroder, Katrin</creator><creator>Seebach, Caroline</creator><creator>Marzi, Ingo</creator><creator>Henrich, Dirk</creator><general>Hindawi Limited</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6746-3400</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201803</creationdate><title>Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat</title><author>Janko, Maren ; Sahm, Julian ; Schaible, Alexander ; Brune, Jan C. ; Bellen, Marlene ; Schroder, Katrin ; Seebach, Caroline ; Marzi, Ingo ; Henrich, Dirk</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3884-28553f620b32adc5bc1d0f0d5bbc8626b55a7839abe84c95783561a00f99775c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Animal models</topic><topic>athymic rat</topic><topic>Autografts</topic><topic>beta tricalcium phosphate</topic><topic>Biocompatibility</topic><topic>Biomedical materials</topic><topic>Bone growth</topic><topic>Bone healing</topic><topic>Bone marrow</topic><topic>bone marrow mononuclear cells</topic><topic>Bone marrow transplantation</topic><topic>Bone matrix</topic><topic>Bone morphogenetic protein 2</topic><topic>Bone surgery</topic><topic>Calcium phosphates</topic><topic>Callus</topic><topic>Cancellous bone</topic><topic>Cbfa-1 protein</topic><topic>Defects</topic><topic>demineralized bone matrix</topic><topic>Demineralizing</topic><topic>experimental study</topic><topic>Femur</topic><topic>Gene expression</topic><topic>Healing</topic><topic>Hydroxyapatite</topic><topic>large bone defect</topic><topic>Leukocytes (mononuclear)</topic><topic>Osteogenesis</topic><topic>Rats</topic><topic>Regeneration</topic><topic>Regeneration (physiology)</topic><topic>Regenerative medicine</topic><topic>Scaffolds</topic><topic>Stem cell transplantation</topic><topic>Stem cells</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Tissue engineering</topic><topic>TRANCE protein</topic><topic>Tricalcium phosphate</topic><topic>Vascular endothelial growth factor</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Janko, Maren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahm, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaible, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brune, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellen, Marlene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schroder, Katrin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seebach, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marzi, Ingo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henrich, Dirk</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Janko, Maren</au><au>Sahm, Julian</au><au>Schaible, Alexander</au><au>Brune, Jan C.</au><au>Bellen, Marlene</au><au>Schroder, Katrin</au><au>Seebach, Caroline</au><au>Marzi, Ingo</au><au>Henrich, Dirk</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat</atitle><jtitle>Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Tissue Eng Regen Med</addtitle><date>2018-03</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>653</spage><epage>666</epage><pages>653-666</pages><issn>1932-6254</issn><eissn>1932-7005</eissn><abstract>Large bone defects often pose major difficulties in orthopaedic surgery. The application of long‐term cultured stem cells combined with a scaffold lead to a significant improvement of bone healing in recent experiments but is strongly restricted by European Union law. Bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMC), however, can be isolated and transplanted within a few hours and have been proven effective in experimental models of bone healing. The effectivity of the BMC‐supported therapy might be influenced by the type of scaffold. Hence, we compared three different scaffolds serving as a carrier for BMC in a rat femoral critical size defect with regard to the osteogenic activity in the defect zone. Human demineralized bone matrix (DBM), bovine cancellous bone hydroxyapatite ceramic (BS), or β‐tricalcium phosphate (β‐TCP) were seeded with human BMC and hereafter implanted into critically sized bone defects of male athymic nude rats. Autologous bone served as a control. Gene activity was measured after 1 week, and bone formation was analysed histologically and radiologically after 8 weeks. Generally, regenerative gene expression (BMP2, RUNX2, VEGF, SDF‐1, and RANKL) as well as bony bridging and callus formation was observed to be most pronounced in defects filled with autologous bone, followed in descending order by DBM, β‐TCP, and BS. Although DBM was superior in most aspects of bone regeneration analysed in comparison to β‐TCP and BS, the level of autologous bone could not be attained.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Hindawi Limited</pub><pmid>28548246</pmid><doi>10.1002/term.2484</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6746-3400</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6254 |
ispartof | Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2018-03, Vol.12 (3), p.653-666 |
issn | 1932-6254 1932-7005 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1903165979 |
source | Wiley Journals |
subjects | Animal models athymic rat Autografts beta tricalcium phosphate Biocompatibility Biomedical materials Bone growth Bone healing Bone marrow bone marrow mononuclear cells Bone marrow transplantation Bone matrix Bone morphogenetic protein 2 Bone surgery Calcium phosphates Callus Cancellous bone Cbfa-1 protein Defects demineralized bone matrix Demineralizing experimental study Femur Gene expression Healing Hydroxyapatite large bone defect Leukocytes (mononuclear) Osteogenesis Rats Regeneration Regeneration (physiology) Regenerative medicine Scaffolds Stem cell transplantation Stem cells Surgical implants Tissue engineering TRANCE protein Tricalcium phosphate Vascular endothelial growth factor |
title | Comparison of three different types of scaffolds preseeded with human bone marrow mononuclear cells on the bone healing in a femoral critical size defect model of the athymic rat |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T22%3A56%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20three%20different%20types%20of%20scaffolds%20preseeded%20with%20human%20bone%20marrow%20mononuclear%20cells%20on%20the%20bone%20healing%20in%20a%20femoral%20critical%20size%20defect%20model%20of%20the%20athymic%20rat&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20tissue%20engineering%20and%20regenerative%20medicine&rft.au=Janko,%20Maren&rft.date=2018-03&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=653&rft.epage=666&rft.pages=653-666&rft.issn=1932-6254&rft.eissn=1932-7005&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/term.2484&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1903165979%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2012908064&rft_id=info:pmid/28548246&rfr_iscdi=true |