Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An in vitro model of biomaterial-augmented microfracture including chondrocyte–progenitor cell interaction

  • Basic Science
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Biomaterials, acting as scaffolds for cell migration and differentiation, may be used to improve outcomes after microfracture. Three mechanisms determine the success of such procedures and are tested herein: the general capacity of adult femoral mesenchymal progenitor cells (MPC) to differentiate into cartilage, their capacity to do so in a biomaterial, and finally potential interactions between MPC and autologous chondrocytes.

Methods

Human adult chondrocytes and MPC were obtained with informed consent and cultured individually or in co-culture on a collagenous biomaterial. Differentiation potential of MPC was assessed using PCR and proliferation and biosynthesis were compared to test for differences between individual cultures and co-cultures. Finally, potential interaction between chondrocytes and MPC was assessed by comparing the observed levels of proliferation and biosynthesis with those expected in independent growth.

Results

We found that adult femoral marrow-derived MPC have the potential to differentiate into multiple lineages, and, seeded in a biomaterial, show similar differentiation when compared with autologous chondrocytes. Finally, there was a strong indication for an interaction between MPC and chondrocytes in biosynthetic activity, which was twice as high as would be expected in independent cell activity. Proliferation rates were unaffected.

Conclusion

Our study showed that biomaterial-augmented microfracture is a viable option in cartilage repair from a biological perspective because adult femoral MPC have a strong capacity to differentiate into chondrocytes, which is further enhanced by the surrounding cartilage. Failure in in vivo studies must be explained by other factors of the intra-articular environment, such as cytokines or biomechanics.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vavken P, Gruber M, Dorotka R (2008) Tissue Engineering in orthopaedic surgery—clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Z Orthop Unfall 146(1):26–30

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Rodrigo JJ (2001) Microfracture: surgical technique and rehabilitation to treat chondral defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res 391(Suppl):S362–S369

    Google Scholar 

  3. Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Rodrigo JJ, Kocher MS, Gill TJ, Rodkey WG (2003) Outcomes of microfracture for traumatic chondral defects of the knee: average 11-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 19(5):477–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Briggs T, Mahroof S, David L, Flannelly J, Pringle J, Bayliss M (2003) Histological evaluation of chondral defects after autologous chondrocyte implantation of the knee. JBJS 85-B:1077–1083

    Google Scholar 

  5. Henderson I, Lavigne P, Valenzuela H, Oakes B (2007) Autologous chondrocyte implantation: superior biologic properties of hyaline cartilage repairs. Clin Orthop Relat Res 455:253–261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dorotka R, Bindreiter U, Macfelda K, Windberger U, Nehrer S (2005) Marrow stimulation and chondrocyte transplantation using a collagen matrix for cartilage repair. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 13(8):655–664

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dorotka R, Windberger UKM, Bindreiter UDTC, Nehrer S (2005) Repair of articular cartilage defects treated by microfracture and a three-dimensional collagen matrix. Biomaterials 26(17):3617–3629

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bartlett W, Skinner JA, Gooding CR, Carrington RWJ, Flanagan AM, Briggs TWR et al (2005) Autologous chondrocyte implantation versus matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation for osteochondral defects of the knee: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87-B(5):640–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Breinan HA, Martin SD, Hsu HP, Spector M (2000) Healing of canine articular cartilage defects treated with microfracture, a type-II collagen matrix, or cultured autologous chondrocytes. J Orthop Res 18(5):781–789

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Huibregtse BA, Johnstone B, Goldberg VM, Caplan AI (2000) Effect of age and sampling site on the chondro-osteogenic potential of rabbit marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells. J Orthop Res 18(1):18–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rebelatto CK, Aguiar AM, Moretao MP, Senegaglia AC, Hansen P, Barchiki F et al (2008) Dissimilar differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, and adipose tissue. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 233(7):901–913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jakob M, Demarteau O, Schafer D, Hintermann B, Dick W, Heberer M et al (2001) Specific growth factors during the expansion and redifferentiation of adult human articular chondrocytes enhance chondrogenesis and cartilaginous tissue formation in vitro. J Cell Biochem 81(2):368–377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jakob M, Demarteau O, Suetterlin R, Heberer M, Martin I (2004) Chondrogenesis of expanded adult human articular chondrocytes is enhanced by specific prostaglandins. Rheumatology 43(7):852–857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tsuchiya K, Chen G, Ushida T, Matsuno T, Tateishi T (2004) The effect of coculture of chondrocytes with mesenchymal stem cells on their cartilaginous phenotype in vitro. Mater Sci Eng C 24(3):391

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nehrer S, Breinan HA, Ramappa A, Young G, Shortkoff S, Louie LK et al (1998) Matrix collagen type and pore size influence behavior of seeded canine chondrocytes. Biomaterials 19:2313–2328

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Farndale RW, Buttle DJ, Barrett AJ (1986) Improved quantitation and discrimination of sulphated glycosaminoglycans by use of dimethylmethylene blue. Biochim Biophys Acta 883(2):173–177

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vavken P, Culen G, Dorotka R (2008) Management of confounding in controlled orthopaedic trials: a cross-sectional study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(4):985–989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nehrer S, Breinan HA, Ramappa A, Shortkroff S, Young G, Minas T et al (1997) Canine chondrocytes seeded in type I and type II collagen implants investigated in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 38(2):95–104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang X, Zheng Z, Liu P, Ma Y, Lin L, Lang N et al (2008) The synergistic effects of microfracture, perforated decalcified cortical bone matrix and adenovirus-bone morphogenetic protein-4 in cartilage defect repair. Biomaterials 29(35):4616–4629

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Murray MM, Weiler A, Spindler KP (2004) Interspecies variation in the fibroblast distribution of the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med 32(6):1484–1491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schulze-Tanzil G, Muller RD, Kohl B, Schneider N, Ertel W, Ipaktchi K et al (2009) Differing in vitro biology of equine, ovine, porcine and human articular chondrocytes derived from the knee joint: an immunomorphological study. Histochem Cell Biol 131(2):219–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Caplan AI, Dennis JE (2006) Mesenchymal stem cells as trophic mediators. J Cell Biochem 98(5):1076–1084

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Caplan AI (2007) Adult mesenchymal stem cells for tissue engineering versus regenerative medicine. J Cell Physiol 213(2):341–347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yoo JU, Barthel TS, Nishimura K, Solchaga L, Caplan AI, Goldberg VM et al (1998) The chondrogenic potential of human bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80(12):1745–1757

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tallheden T, Dennis JE, Lennon DP, Sjogren-Jansson E, Caplan AI, Lindahl A (2003) Phenotypic plasticity of human articular chondrocytes. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(Suppl 2):93–100

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wagner W, Wein F, Seckinger A, Frankhauser M, Wirkner U, Krause U et al (2005) Comparative characteristics of mesenchymal stem cells from human bone marrow, adipose tissue, and umbilical cord blood. Exp Hematol 33(11):1402–1416

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosowski M, Falb M, Tschirschmann M, Lauster R (2006) Initiation of mesenchymal condensation in alginate hollow spheres—a useful model for understanding cartilage repair? Artif Organs 30(10):775–784

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Maleski MP, Knudson CB (1996) Hyaluronan-mediated aggregation of limb bud mesenchyme and mesenchymal condensation during chondrogenesis. Exp Cell Res 225(1):55–66

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Marijnissen WJ (2000) Tissue-engineered cartilage using serially passaged articular chondrocytes. Chondrocytes in alginate, combined in vivo with a synthetic (E310) or biologic degradable carrier (DBM). Biomaterials 21:771–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hickery MS, Bayliss MT, Dudhia J, Lewthwaite JC, Edwards JC, Pitsillides AA (2003) Age-related changes in the response of human articular cartilage to IL-1alpha and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta): chondrocytes exhibit a diminished sensitivity to TGF-beta. J Biol Chem 278(52):53063–53071

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. DeGroot J, Verzijl N, Bank RA, Lafeber FP, Bijlsma JW, TeKoppele JM (1999) Age-related decrease in proteoglycan synthesis of human articular chondrocytes: the role of nonenzymatic glycation. Arthritis Rheum 42(5):1003–1009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Csaki C, Matis U, Mobasheri A, Shakibaei M (2009) Co-culture of canine mesenchymal stem cells with primary bone-derived osteoblasts promotes osteogenic differentiation. Histochem Cell Biol 131(2):251–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was financially supported by the Medizinisch-Wissenschaftlicher Fonds des Bürgermeisters der Bundeshauptstadt Wien.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sports Medicine Research Laboratory, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Children’s Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, 300 Longwood Avenue Enders 1016, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Patrick Vavken

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Patrick Vavken, Ferdi Arrich, Magdalena Pilz & Ronald Dorotka

Authors
  1. Patrick Vavken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ferdi Arrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Magdalena Pilz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ronald Dorotka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Vavken.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vavken, P., Arrich, F., Pilz, M. et al. An in vitro model of biomaterial-augmented microfracture including chondrocyte–progenitor cell interaction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130, 711–716 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1079-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1079-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation