Tissue-Engineered Hydroxyapatite Bone Scaffold Impregnated with Osteoprogenitor Cells Promotes Bone Regeneration in Sheep Model



Managing massive bone defects, a great challenge to orthopaedics reconstructive surgery. The problem arise is the supply of suitable bone is limited with many complications. Tissue-engineered hydroxyapatite bone (TEHB) scaffold impregnated with osteoprogenitor cells developed as an alternative to promote bone regeneration.


This animal protocol has been approved by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Animal Ethical Committee. The TEHB scaffold prepared from hydroxyapatite using gel casting method. A total of six adolescent female sheep were chosen for this study. Later, all the sheep were euthanized in a proper manner and the bone harvested for biomechanical study. Bone marrow was collected from iliac crest of the sheep and bone marrow stem cells (BMSCs) isolated and cultured. BMSCs then cultured in osteogenic medium for osteoprogenitor cells development and the plasma collected was seeded with osteoprogenitor cells mixed with calcium chloride. Bone defect of 3 cm length of tibia bone created from each sheep leg and implanted with autologous and TEHB scaffold in 2 different groups of sheep. Wound site was monitored weekly until the wound completely healed and conventional X-ray performed at week 1 and 24. Shear test was conducted to determine the shear force on the autologous bone and TEHB scaffold after implantation for 24 weeks.


All of the sheep survived without any complications during the study period and radiograph showed new bone formation. Later, the bone harvested was for biomechanical study. The highest shear force for the autologous group was 13 MPa and the lowest was 5 MPa while for the scaffold group, the highest was 10 MPa and the lowest was 3 MPa. Although, proximal and distal interface of autologous bone graft shows higher shear strength compared to the TEHB scaffold but there is no significant difference in both groups, p value > 0.05. Histologically in both proximal and distal interface in both arms shows bone healing and woven bone formation.


TEHB scaffold impregnated with osteoprogenitor cells has the potential to be developed as a bone substitute in view of its strength and capability to promote bone regeneration.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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


  1. 1.

    Baghaei K, Hashemi SM, Tokhanbigli S, Asadi Rad A, Assadzadeh-Aghdaei H, Sharifian A, et al. Isolation, differentiation, and characterization of mesenchymal stem cells from human bone marrow. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2017;10:208–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Polo-Corrales L, Latorre-Esteves M, Ramirez-Vick JE. Scaffold design for bone regeneration. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2014;14:15–56.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Sohn HS, Oh JK. Review of bone graft and bone substitutes with an emphasis on fracture surgeries. Biomater Res. 2019;23:9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Mareschi K, Ferrero I, Rustichelli D, Aschero S, Gammaitoni L, Aglietta M, et al. Expansion of mesenchymal stem cells isolated from pediatric and adult donor bone marrow. J Cell Biochem. 2006;97:744–54.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Ho-Shui-Ling A, Bolander J, Rustom LE, Johnson AW, Luyten FP, Picart C. Bone regeneration strategies: engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives. Biomaterials. 2018;180:143–62.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Zhu H, Guo ZK, Jiang XX, Li H, Wang XY, Yao HY, et al. A protocol for isolation and culture of mesenchymal stem cells from mouse compact bone. Nat Protoc. 2010;5:550–60.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Wang W, Yeung KWK. Bone grafts and biomaterials substitutes for bone defect repair: a review. Bioact Mater. 2017;2:224–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Roseti L, Parisi V, Petretta M, Cavallo C, Desando G, Bartolotti I, et al. Scaffolds for bone tissue engineering: state of the art and new perspectives. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017;78:1246–62.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kattimani VS, Kondaka S, Lingamaneni KP. Hydroxyapatite—past, present, and future in bone regeneration. Bone Tissue Regen Insights. 2016;7:9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ficai A, Andronescu E, Voicu G, Ficai D. Advances in collagen/hydroxyapatite composite materials. In: Attaf B, edior. Advances in composite materials for medicine and nanotechnology, IntechOpen; 2011. Chapter 1. https://doi.org/10.5772/13707.

  11. 11.

    Zhou H, Lee J. Nanoscale hydroxyapatite particles for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2011;7:2769–81.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Lim J, Razi ZRM, Law JX, Nawi AM, Idrus RBH, Chin TG, et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells from the maternal segment of human umbilical cord is ideal for bone regeneration in allogenic setting. Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2018;15:75–87.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Zhou J, Xu C, Wu G, Cao X, Zhang L, Zhai Z, et al. In vitro generation of osteochondral differentiation of human marrow mesenchymal stem cells in novel collagen–hydroxyapatite layered scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2011;7:3999–4006.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Whelan DB, Bhandari M, Stephen D, Kreder H, McKee MD, Zdero R, et al. Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J Trauma. 2010;68:629–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Mirzasadeghi A, Narayanan SS, Ng MH, Sanaei R, Cheng CH, Bajuri MY, et al. Intramedullary cement osteosynthesis (IMCO): a pilot study in sheep. Biomed Mater Eng. 2014;24:2177–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Petite H, Viateau V, Bensaïd W, Meunier A, de Pollak C, Bourguignon M, et al. Tissue-engineered bone regeneration. Nat Biotechnol. 2000;18:959–63.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Izzawati B, Daud R, Afendi M, Majid MA, Zain NAM, Bajuri Y. Stress analysis of implant-bone fixation at different fracture angle. J Phys Conf Ser. 2017;908:012019.

Download references

Author information




Study design: MYB, NS and NMH. Drafting of study protocol: MYB, NS and NMH. Sample collection and laboratory analysis: NMH. Statistical analysis and interpretation of results: MYB, NS and NMH. Drafting of the initial manuscript: MYB, NS and NMH. Revision and editing of the manuscript: MYB, NS, FNDS, MHAS and NMH. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohd Yazid Bajuri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics statement

The animal protocol was reviewed and been approved by the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Animal Ethical Committee (no. FF-2015-369).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Stress–strain curves are provided as supplementary document.

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 196 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bajuri, M.Y., Selvanathan, N., Dzeidee Schaff, F.N. et al. Tissue-Engineered Hydroxyapatite Bone Scaffold Impregnated with Osteoprogenitor Cells Promotes Bone Regeneration in Sheep Model. Tissue Eng Regen Med 18, 377–385 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-021-00343-2

Download citation


  • Bone scaffold
  • Hydroxyapatite
  • Tissue-engineered
  • Osteoprogenitor cells
  • Bone regeneration