Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enhanced repair of segmental bone defects in rabbit radius by porous tantalum scaffolds modified with the RGD peptide

  • Clinical Applications of Biomaterials
  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fast and stable repair of segmental bone defects remains a challenge for clinical orthopedic surgery. In recent years, porous tantalum has been widely applied in clinical orthopedics for low modulus of elasticity, with three-dimensional microstructures similar to cancellous bone and excellent biocompatibility. To further improve bone the repairing ability of porous tantalum, the cyclo(–RGDfK-) peptide was coated on the surface of porous tantalum scaffolds. A model of 15 mm segmental defect was made at the midshaft of right radius in New Zealand White rabbits. In the experimental group, defects were implanted (press-fit) using porous tantalum scaffolds modified with cyclo(-RGDfK-) peptide. Control animals were implanted with non-modified porous tantalum scaffolds or xenogeneic cancellous bone scaffolds, respectively. No implant was provided for the blank group. Bone repair was assessed by X-ray and histological observations at 4, 8, and 16 weeks post-operation, with biomechanical tests and micro-computed tomography performed at 16 weeks post-surgery. The results showed that bone formation was increased at the interface and inside the inner pores of modified porous tantalum scaffolds than those of non-modified porous tantalum scaffolds; biomechanical properties in the modified porous tantalum group were superior to those of the non-modified porous tantalum and xenogeneic cancellous bone groups, while new bone volume fractions using micro-computed tomography analysis were similar between the modified porous tantalum and xenogeneic cancellous bone groups. Our findings suggested that modified porous tantalum scaffolds had enhanced repairing ability in segmental bone defect in rabbit radius, and may serve as a potential material for repairing large bone defects.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Han CS, Wood MB, Bishop AT, Cooney WP. Vascularized bone transfer. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:1441–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Soucacos PN, Dailiana Z, Beris AE, Johnson EO. Vascularised bone grafts for the management of non-union. Injury. 2006;37:S41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fujioka M, Hayashida K, Murakami C. Vascularized bone graft is a better option for the reconstruction of maxillary defects. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;270:2779–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brekke JH, Toth JM. Principles of tissue engineering applied to programmable osteogenesis. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;43:380–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deschamps AA, Claase MB, Sleijster WJ, de Bruijn JD, Grijpma DW, Feijen J. Design of segmented poly (ether ester) materials and structures for the tissue engineering of bone. J Control Release. 2002;78:175–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ryan G, Pandit A, Apatsidis DP. Fabrication methods of porous metals for use in orthopaedic applications. Biomaterials. 2006;27:2651–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yang J, Chen HJ, Zhu XD, et al. Enhanced repair of a critical-sized segmental bone defect in rabbit femur by surface microstructured porous titanium. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25:1747–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhang M, Wang GL, Zhang HF, et al. Repair of segmental long bone defect in a rabbit radius nonunion model: comparison of cylindrical porous titanium and hydroxyapatite scaffolds. Artif Organs. 2014;38:493–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kamath AF, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD. Porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss in revision knee arthroplasty: a five to nine-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:216–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wigfield C, Robertson J, Gill S, Nelson R. Clinical experience with porous tantalum cervical interbody implants in a prospective randomized controlled tria. Br J Neurosurg. 2003;17:418–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhang Y, Li L, Shi Z, Wang J, Li ZH. Porous tantalum rod implant is an effective and safe choice for early-stage femoral head necrosis: a meta-analysis of clinical trials. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2013;23:211–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pakos EE, Megas P, Paschos NK, et al. Modified porous tantalum rod technique for the treatment of femoral head osteonecrosis. World J Orthop. 2015;6:829–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Elmengaard B, Bechtold JE, Søballe K. In vivo study of the effect of RGD treatment on bone ongrowth on press-fit titanium alloy implants. Biomaterials. 2005;26:3521–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mas-Moruno C, Dorfner PM, Manzenrieder F, et al. Behavior of primary human osteoblasts on trimmed and sandblasted Ti6Al4V surfaces functionalized with integrin αvβ3-selective cyclic RGD peptides. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2013;101:87–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang Q, Zhang H, Li Q, et al. Biocompatibility and osteogenic properties of porous tantalum. Exp Ther Med. 2015;9:780–6.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kantlehner M, Schaffner P, Finsinger D, et al. Surface coating with cyclic RGD peptides stimulates osteoblast adhesion and proliferation as well as bone formation. Chembiochem. 2000;1:107–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Magdolen U, Auernheimer J, Dahmen C, et al. Growth promoting in vitro effect of synthetic cyclic RGD-peptides on human osteoblast-like cells attached to cancellous bone. Int J Mol Med. 2006;17:1017–21.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mas-Moruno C, Garrido B, Rodriguez D, et al. Biofunctionalization strategies on tantalum-based materials for osseointegrative applications. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kroese-Deutman HC, van den Dolder J, Spauwen PH, et al. Influence of RGD-loaded titanium implants on bone formation in vivo. Tissue Eng. 2005;11:1867–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Periasamy K, Watson WS, Mohammed A, et al. A randomised study of peri-prosthetic bone density after cemented versus trabecular fixation of a polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:1033–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sinclair SK, Konz GJ, Dawson JM, Epperson RT, Bloebaum RD. Host bone response to polyetheretherketone versus porous tantalum implants for cervical spinal fusion in a goat mode. Spine. 2012;37:E571–E80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yoshikawa H, Tamai N, Murase T, Myoui A. Interconnected porous hydroxyapatite ceramics for bone tissue engineering. J R Soc Interface. 2009;6:S341–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lu JX, Flautre B, Anselme K, et al. Role of interconnections in porous bioceramics on bone recolonization in vitro and in vivo. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1999;10:111–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bai F, Wang Z, Lu J, et al. The correlation between the internal structure and vascularization of controllable porous bioceramic materials in vivo: a quantitative study. Tissue Eng Part A. 2010;16:3791–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Barralet JE, Grover L, Gaunt T, Wright AJ, Gibson IR. Preparation of macroporous calcium phosphate cement tissue engineering scaffold. Biomaterials. 2002;23:3063–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lin AS, Barrows TH, Cartmell SH, Guldberg RE. Microarchitectural and mechanical characterization of orientedporous polymer scaffolds. Biomaterials. 2003;24:481–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kroese-Deutman HC, Vehof JW, Spauwen PH, Stoelinga PJ, Jansen JA. Orthotopic bone formation in titanium fiber mesh loaded with platelet-rich plasma and placed in segmental defects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;37:542–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Roohani-Esfahani SI, Dunstan CR, Davies B, Pearce S, Williams R, Zreiqat H. Repairing a critical-sized bone defect with highly porous modified and unmodified baghdadite scaffolds. Acta biomater. 2012;8:4162–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim J, McBride S, Donovan A, Darr A, Magno MH, Hollinger JO. Tyrosine-derived polycarbonate scaffolds for bone regeneration in a rabbit radius critical-size defect model. Biomed Mater. 2015;10:035001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schmitz JP, Hollinger JO. The critical size defect as an experimental model for cranion mandibulofacial nonunions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;205:299–308.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hedberg EL, Kroese-Deutman HC, Shih CK, et al. Methods: a comparative analysis of radiography, microcomputed tomography, and histology for bone tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. 2005;11:1356–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Han D, Li J. Repair of bone defect by using vascular bundle implantation combined with Runx II gene-transfected adipose-derived stem cells and a biodegradable matrix. Cell Tissue Res. 2013;352:561–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Li X, Lin Z, Duan Y, et al. Repair of large segmental bone defects in rabbits using BMP and FGF composite xenogeneic bone. Genet Mol Res. 2015;14:6395–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Athanasiou VT, Papachristou DJ, Panagopoulos A, et al. Histological comparison of autograft, allograft-DBM, xenograft, and synthetic grafts in a trabecular bone defect: an experimental study in rabbits. Med Sci Monit. 2010;16:BR24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wang G, Zhao S, Yu H, et al. Design, analysis and simulation for development of the first clinical micro-CT scanner. Acad Radiol. 2005;12:511–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Huiskes R, Weinans H, Van Rietbergen B. The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;274:124–34.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hanzlik JA, Day JS, Rimnac CM, Kurtz SM. Is There A Difference in Bone Ingrowth in Modular Versus Monoblock Porous Tantalum Tibial Trays? J Arthroplasty. 2015;30:1073–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Jun Wang and Pengzhen Cheng from Xijing Hosipital affiliated, Fourth Military Medical University of China, for technical help in Micro-CT and biomechanical tests. This study was supported by the National Key Technology Support Program of China (Contract Grant No. 2012BAE06B03).

Author contributions

Z.W. and Q.L. conceived and designed the study; H.W., Q.W., H.Z., W.S., H.G., and H.S. performed the experiments; H.W., Z.W., and Q.L. analyzed the data; H.W. drafted the article; Z.W., Q.L., and H.S. revised the article. All authors approved the article for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hand Surgery Department, Tangshan orthopaedic hospital affiliated, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, Hebei, 063000, P.R. China

    Hui Wang

  2. Experimental Center, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, Hebei, 063000, P.R. China

    Qijia Li

  3. Department of Anatomy, Basic Medical College, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, Hebei, 063000, P.R. China

    Qian Wang

  4. Department of Joint Surgery, Tangshan orthopaedic hospital affiliated, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, Hebei, 063000, P.R. China

    Hui Zhang

  5. Department of Orthopaedics, Affiliated Hospital, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, Hebei, 063000, P.R. China

    Wei Shi, Hongquan Gan, Huiping Song & Zhiqiang Wang

Authors
  1. Hui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qijia Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Qian Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hui Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wei Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hongquan Gan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Huiping Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Zhiqiang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiqiang Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, H., Li, Q., Wang, Q. et al. Enhanced repair of segmental bone defects in rabbit radius by porous tantalum scaffolds modified with the RGD peptide. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 28, 50 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-017-5860-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-017-5860-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation