The data on biomaterial-mediated bone regeneration directly comparing commercially available scaffolds in aging and osteoporotic conditions remain sparse.
Objective:
To investigate the effects of an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS) and a medical grade polycaprolactone-tricalcium phosphate (mPCL-TCP) scaffold on calvarial defect healing in ovary-intact and ovariectomized rats.
Methods:
Forty-two, 5-month old female Sprague–Dawley rats were divided into sham (OVI) or ovariectomy (OVX) groups (). When rats reached 6 months old, 7 mm diameter calvarial defects were created and treated, further dividing each group into blood clot control, mPCL-TCP, or ACS subgroups (). After four weeks, the calvarial specimens were evaluated using micro-computed tomography for bone volume fraction (BVF), and histopathology.
Results:
The effects of ovariectomy were confirmed by changes in body, uterine, and vaginal weight, and osteopenia in the femur. A significant increase in BVF was observed in ACS-subgroups compared with their respective control groups (). Histopathological analysis revealed no cellular inflammatory infiltrate in any group. Fibrous tissue encapsulated the mPCL-TCP, while the ACS was well-integrated with the bone matrix. The OVX groups presented more osteoid and enlarged marrow cavities compared with the OVI groups.
Conclusion:
ACS scaffold enhanced calvarial bone regeneration in OVI and OVX rats after four weeks.
Consensus development conference: Diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of osteoporosis, American Journal of Medicine6 (1993), 646–650.
2.
Polo-CorralesL.Latorre-EstevesM. and Ramirez-VickJ.E., Scaffold design for bone regeneration, Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology1 (2014), 15–56. doi:10.1166/jnn.2014.9127.
3.
SchellerE.KrebsbachP. and KohnD., Tissue engineering: State of the art in oral rehabilitation, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation5 (2009), 368–389. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.01939.x.
4.
García-GaretaE.CoathupM.J. and BlunnG.W., Osteoinduction of bone grafting materials for bone repair and regeneration, Bone81 (2015), 112–121. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2015.07.007.
5.
McPhersonJ.M., The utility of collagen-based vehicles in delivery of growth factors for hard and soft tissue wound repair, Clinical Materials3–4 (1992), 225–234. doi:10.1016/0267-6605(92)90103-Z.
6.
KinoshitaY. and MaedaH., Recent developments of functional scaffolds for craniomaxillofacial bone tissue engineering applications, The Scientific World Journal2013 (2013), 863157. doi:10.1155/2013/863157.
7.
ZhouY.HutmacherD.W.VarawanS.L. and LimT.M., In vitro bone engineering based on polycaprolactone and polycaprolactone–tricalcium phosphate composites, Polymer International3 (2007), 333–342. doi:10.1002/pi.2138.
8.
WoodruffM.A. and HutmacherD.W., The return of a forgotten polymer – polycaprolactone in the 21st century, Progress in Polymer Science10 (2010), 1217–1256. doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.04.002.
9.
VajgelA.MardasN.FariasB.C.PetrieA.CimõesR. and DonosN., A systematic review on the critical size defect model, Clinical Oral Implants Research8 (2014), 879–893. doi:10.1111/clr.12194.
10.
SchmidtC.PriemelM.KohlerT.WeustenA.MüllerR.AmlingM.et al., Precision and accuracy of peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) in the mouse skeleton compared with histology and microcomputed tomography (μCT), Journal of Bone and Mineral Research8 (2003), 1486–1496. doi:10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.8.1486.
11.
BoschC.MelsenB. and VargervikK., Importance of the critical-size bone defect in testing bone-regenerating materials, Journal of Craniofacial Surgery4 (1998), 310–316. doi:10.1097/00001665-199807000-00004.
12.
SchmitzJ.P. and HollingerJ.O., The critical size defect as an experimental model for craniomandibulofacial nonunions, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research205 (1986), 299–308.
13.
BouxseinM.L.BoydS.K.ChristiansenB.A.GuldbergR.E.JepsenK.J. and MüllerR., Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography, Journal of Bone and Mineral Research7 (2010), 1468–1486. doi:10.1002/jbmr.141.
14.
SawyerA.SongS.SusantoE.ChuanP.LamC.WoodruffM.et al., The stimulation of healing within a rat calvarial defect by mPCL–TCP/collagen scaffolds loaded with rhBMP-2, Biomaterials13 (2009), 2479–2488. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.055.
15.
TuanH.S. and HutmacherD.W., Application of micro CT and computation modeling in bone tissue engineering, Computer-Aided Design11 (2005), 1151–1161. doi:10.1016/j.cad.2005.02.006.
16.
CornellC.N. and LaneJ.M., Current understanding of osteoconduction in bone regeneration, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research355(Suppl) (1998), S267–S273. doi:10.1097/00003086-199810001-00027.
17.
DonzelliE.SalvadeA.MimoP.ViganoM.MorroneM.PapagnaR.et al., Mesenchymal stem cells cultured on a collagen scaffold: In vitro osteogenic differentiation, Archives of Oral Biology1 (2007), 64–73. doi:10.1016/j.archoralbio.2006.07.007.
18.
KiharaT.HiroseM.OshimaA. and OhgushiH., Exogenous type I collagen facilitates osteogenic differentiation and acts as a substrate for mineralization of rat marrow mesenchymal stem cells in vitro, Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications4 (2006), 1029–1035. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.01.059.
19.
PryorM.E.PolimeniG.KooK.T.HartmanM.J.GrossH.AprilM.et al., Analysis of rat calvaria defects implanted with a platelet-rich plasma preparation: Histologic and histometric observations, Journal of Clinical Periodontology9 (2005), 966–972. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00772.x.
20.
ThompsonD.SimmonsH.PirieC. and KeH., FDA guidelines and animal models for osteoporosis, Bone4 (1995), S125–S133.
21.
WillettT.L.PasqualeJ. and GrynpasM.D., Collagen modifications in postmenopausal osteoporosis: Advanced glycation endproducts may affect bone volume, structure and quality, Current Osteoporosis Reports3 (2014), 329–337. doi:10.1007/s11914-014-0214-3.
22.
CalciolariE.MardasN.DerekaX.KostomitsopoulosN.PetrieA. and DonosN., The effect of experimental osteoporosis on bone regeneration: Part 1, histology findings, Clinical Oral Implants Research28 (2017), e101–e110. doi:10.1111/clr.12936.
23.
MardasN.BusettiJ.de FigueiredoJ.A.P.MezzomoL.A.ScarparoR.K. and DonosN., Guided bone regeneration in osteoporotic conditions following treatment with zoledronic acid, Clinical Oral Implants Research3 (2017), 362–371. doi:10.1111/clr.12810.
24.
MatsuuraT.TokutomiK.SasakiM.KatafuchiM.MizumachiE. and SatoH., Distinct characteristics of mandibular bone collagen relative to long bone collagen: relevance to clinical dentistry, BioMed Research International2014 (2014), 769414. doi:10.1155/2014/769414.
25.
AlmazrooaS.A.NoonanV. and WooS.-B., Resorbable collagen membranes: Histopathologic features, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology2 (2014), 236–240. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2014.04.006.
26.
AndersonJ.M., Biological responses to materials, Annual Review of Materials Research1 (2001), 81–110. doi:10.1146/annurev.matsci.31.1.81.
27.
NussK.M. and von RechenbergB., Biocompatibility issues with modern implants in bone – A review for clinical orthopedics, The Open Orthopaedics Journal2 (2008), 66–78. doi:10.2174/1874325000802010066.
