Abstract

Regeneration of large bone defects is a major objective in trauma surgery. Bone marrow mononuclear cell (BMC)-supported bone healing was shown to be efficient after immobilization on a scaffold. We hypothesized that fibrous demineralized bone matrix (DBM) in various forms with BMCs is superior to granular DBM. A total of 65 male SD rats were assigned to five treatment groups: syngenic cancellous bone (SCB), fibrous demineralized bone matrix (f-DBM), fibrous demineralized bone matrix densely packed (f-DBM 120%), DBM granules (GDBM) and DBM granules 5% calcium phosphate (GDBM5%Ca2+). BMCs from donor rats were combined with different scaffolds and placed into 5 mm femoral bone defects. After 8 weeks, bone mineral density (BMD), biomechanical stability and histology were assessed. Similar biomechanical properties of f-DBM and SCB defects were observed. Similar bone and cartilage formation was found in all groups, but a significantly bigger residual defect size was found in GDBM. High bone healing scores were found in f-DBM (25) and SCB (25). The application of DBM in fiber form combined with the application of BMCs shows promising results comparable to the gold standard, syngenic cancellous bone. Denser packing of fibers or higher amount of calcium phosphate has no positive effect.

Highlights

  • Large bone defects occur after high force trauma, osteomyelitis or tumor resection.The large defects have always been a major challenge for treatment and costs

  • The effects of new demineralized bone matrix (DBM) application forms combined with Bone marrow mononuclear cell (BMC) on the bone healing in a critically sized femoral defect of the rat were investigated and compared to the gold standard treatment

  • The different DBM application forms were transplanted after addition of BMCs into a plate-stabilized, femoral critical-size bone defect of 5 mm in SD rats

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Large bone defects occur after high force trauma, osteomyelitis or tumor resection.The large defects have always been a major challenge for treatment and costs. There is a limited availability of autologous bone, the surgical times are extended, loosening of the alloplastic implant is possible in the course of treatment and there are possible immunogenic reactions to allogenic grafts [1,2,3]. Due to these limitations, it is necessary to find an appropriate substitute. From human allografts to xenografts and artificial bone materials, are available on the market All these materials were tested alone or in combination with cells in different bone defect models [4,5]

Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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