Adult rat bones maintain distinct regionalized expression of markers associated with their development

Guiding bone formation in a critical-sized defect and assessments

PURPOSE

Development of alternatives to autologous bone has been served by many hypotheses and developments. Favorable properties of synthetic materials used currently in bone grafting support tissue differentiation without shielding capacity for integrated modeling. Ideally, new materials provide tissue compatibility and minimize patient morbidity and are attractive because of potential for in situ delivery, isothermal polymerization, porous structure, and nontoxic chemistry. For application in cranial bone, ability for materials to be laid adjacent to brain and offer postsurgical protection without neural risk is a critical asset.

METHODS

Kryptonite Bone Cement (KBC) meets the property criteria for cranial bone repair with regard to adhesive, conductive, and biologic transparency and US Food and Drug Administration approval for cranial bone void repair. To better delineate the morphology effective in cranial bone repair, a comparison was made between KBC and BoneSource, another material approved for the same indication. After Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approval, the study assessed 24 rabbits, each with 2 separate cranial implants, to evaluate integration and absorption of the biomaterial at defined time points of 12, 18, 24, and 36 weeks.

RESULTS

The 36-week assessment demonstrated near-complete resorption/integration of the BoneSource graft material. Bone was present within the biomaterial as well as independent of contact. The KBC was similarly integrated throughout the mass of the material, and new bone was in contact with the grafting material and also seen as separate islands of new bone. The bone demonstrated lamellar bone architecture with clear trabecular morphology. At higher magnification, the bone architecture can be clearly delineated, and comparison between the graft fillers is not obvious relative to the bone that has formed. Despite microscopic similarities, the most striking difference was maintenance of scaffold anatomy during bone regeneration.

CONCLUSIONS

Kryptonite Bone Cement meets the criteria described in the introduction; properties of biologic transparency, osteoconductivity, and ergonomic utility offer other potential uses in bone repair. Key tenets of bone tissue regeneration observed in this analysis included adequate cell differentiation and tissue support. Bone that formed demonstrated lamellar rather than woven bone to suggest response to loading strain rather than merely biochemical precipitation. Over the 36-week study, the graft showed progressive bioabsorbable potential with calibrated replacement.

Periodontal regeneration: a challenge for the tissue engineer?

Periodontitis affects around 15 per cent of human adult populations. While periodontal treatment aimed at removing the bacterial cause of the disease is generally very successful, the ability predictably to regenerate the damaged tissues remains a major unmet objective for new treatment strategies. Existing treatments include the use of space-maintaining barrier membranes (guided tissue regeneration), use of graft materials, and application of bioactive molecules to induce regeneration, but their overall effects are relatively modest and restricted in application. The periodontal ligament is rich in mesenchymal stem cells, and the understanding of the signalling molecules that may regulate their differentation has increased enormously in recent years. Applying these principles for the development of new tissue engineering strategies for periodontal regeneration will require further work to determine the efficacy of current experimental preclinical treatments, including pharmacological application of growth factors such as bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) or Wnts, use of autologous stem cell reimplantation strategies, and development of improved biomaterial scaffolds. This article describes the background to this problem, addresses the current status of periodontal regeneration, including the background biology, and discusses the potential for some of these experimental therapies to achieve the goal of clinically predictable periodontal regeneration.