In vivo performance of bilayer hydroxyapatite scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration in the rabbit radius
- 409 Downloads
The objective of this study was to investigate the in vivo biomechanical performance of bone defects implanted with novel bilayer hydroxyapatite (HAp) scaffolds that mimic the cortical and cancellous organization of bone. The scaffolds maintained architectural continuity in a rabbit radius segmental defect model and were compared to an untreated defect group (negative control) and autologous bone grafts (positive control). Micro-CT evaluations indicated total bone and scaffold volume in the experimental group was significantly greater than the defect group but lesser than the autologous bone graft treatment. The flexural toughness of the scaffold and the autograft groups was significantly greater than the flexural toughness of the defect group. Interestingly, the absolute density of the bone mineral as well as calcium to phosphorus (Ca/P) ratio in that mineral for the scaffold and autograft contralateral bones was significantly higher than those for the defect contralaterals suggesting that the scaffolds contributed to calcium homeostasis. It was concluded from this study that new bone regenerated in the bilayer HAp scaffolds was comparable to the empty defects and while the HAp scaffolds provided significant increase in modulus when compared to empty defect and their flexural toughness was comparable to autografts after 8 weeks of implantation.
KeywordsBone Ingrowth Flexural Modulus Contralateral Limb Defect Group Autologous Bone Graft
This study was supported in part by the Department of Defense funds and the Orthopaedic Extremity Trauma Research Program grants (USAMRMC # W81XWH-08-1-0393 and W81XWH-07-1-0717). The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the author and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense.
- 1.Greenwald AS, Boden SD, Goldberg VM, Khan Y, Laurencin CT, Rosier RN. Bone-graft substitutes: facts, fictions, and applications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:98–103.Google Scholar
- 3.Glancy GL, Brugioni DJ, Eilert RE, Chang FM. Autograft versus allograft for benign lesions in children. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;262:28–33.Google Scholar
- 7.Appleford MR, Oh S, Oh N, Ong JL. In vivo study on hydroxyapatite scaffolds with trabecular architecture for bone repair. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;89(4):1019–27.Google Scholar
- 10.Costantino PD, Friedman CD, Jones K, Chow LC, Pelzer HJ, Sisson GA Sr. Hydroxyapatite cement. I. Basic chemistry and histologic properties. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1991;17(4):379–84.Google Scholar
- 12.Kuboki Y, Jin Q, Takita H. Geometry of carriers controlling phenotypic expression in BMP-induced osteogenesis and chondrogenesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:S105–15.Google Scholar
- 15.Daculsi G, Passuti N. Effect of the macroporosity for osseous substitution of calcium phosphate ceramics. Biomaterials. 1990;11:86–7.Google Scholar
- 21.Bowers KW, Edmonds JL, Girod DA, Jayaraman G, Chua CP, Toby EB. Osteocutaneous radial forearm free flaps. The necessity of internal fixation of the donor-site defect to prevent pathological fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(5):694–704.Google Scholar