Abstract

The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy of hybrid constructs in comparison to bone grafts (autograft and allograft) for posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in sheep, instrumented with transpedicular screws and bars. Hybrid constructs using cultured bone marrow (BM) mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown promising results in several bone healing models. In particular, hybrid constructs made by calcium phosphate-enriched cells have had similar fusion rates to bone autografts in posterolateral lumbar fusion in sheep. In our study, four experimental spinal fusions in two animal groups were compared in sheep: autograft and allograft (reference group), hydroxyapatite scaffold, and hydroxyapatite scaffold seeded with cultured and osteoinduced bone marrow MSCs (hybrid construct). During the last three days of culture, dexamethasone (dex) and beta-glycerophosphate (β-GP) were added to potentiate osteoinduction. The two experimental situations of each group were tested in the same spinal segment (L4–L5). Spinal fusion and bone formation were studied by clinical observation, X-ray, computed tomography (CT), histology, and histomorphometry. Lumbar fusion rates assessed by CT scan and histology were higher for autograft and allograft (70%) than for mineral scaffold alone (22%) and hybrid constructs (35%). The quantity of new bone formation was also higher for the reference group, quite similar in both (autograft and allograft). Although the hybrid scaffold group had a better fusion rate than the non-hybrid scaffold group, the histological analysis revealed no significant differences between them in terms of quantity of bone formation. The histology results suggested that mineral scaffolds were partly resorbed in an early phase, and included in callus tissues. Far from the callus area the hydroxyapatite alone did not generate bone around it, but the hybrid scaffold did. In nude mice, labeled cells were induced to differentiate in vivo and monitored by bioluminescence imaging (BLI). Although the cultured MSCs had osteogenic potential, their contribution to spinal fusion when seeded in mineral scaffolds, in the conditions disclosed here, remains uncertain probably due to callus interference with the scaffolds. At present, bone autografts are better than hybrid constructs for posterolateral lumbar fusion, but we should continue to seek better conditions for efficient tissue engineering.

Highlights

  • Nowadays, posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) is a standardized surgical technique that requires firm fixation for mechanical stability, and uses the addition of a bone graft to enhance bone formation [1].The intervention consists of two main steps: a firm fixation for mechanical stability, and the addition of a biological substance for bone formation enhancement

  • To investigate the osteogenic potential of the construct to be tested for spinal fusion, sheep marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) isolated and expanded in adherent cultures or in collagen gels treated in vitro with osteogenic agents were adsorbed on HA fragments (Figure 1a)

  • In posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in comparison with bone grafts. Before using these hybrid constructs for spinal fusion, in the present investigation, mixed sheep MSCs coming from both types of cultures were proved to form bone tissue in nude mice when seeded in mineral scaffolds (HA)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) is a standardized surgical technique that requires firm fixation for mechanical stability, and uses the addition of a bone graft to enhance bone formation [1]. The intervention consists of two main steps: a firm fixation for mechanical stability, and the addition of a biological substance for bone formation enhancement. Permanent stability, and bone autograft is the gold standard. PLF does not require recreating the original anatomy but, the formation of a heterotopic bone bridge where there is usually no bone. This may be one of the causes of the high clinical failure rate, which is above

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.