Background:Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) is a single-stage alternative to autologous chondrocyte implantation for treatment of localized cartilage defects of the knee. To our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial exists comparing the 2 methods.Purpose:To evaluate any difference in the outcome of AMIC as compared with collagen-covered autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI-C).Study Design:Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to assess any differences in the outcomes between ACI-C and AMIC for the treatment of ≥1 chondral or osteochondral defects of the distal femur and/or patella. The inclusion period was set to 3 years, and the aim was to include 80 patients (40 in each group). Patient inclusion was broad, with few exclusion criteria. The primary outcome was change in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2 years as compared with baseline. The secondary outcomes were the number of failures in each group at 2 years and the change in KOOS subscale, Lysholm, and pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 2 years as compared with baseline. A 2-sample t test with a significance level of P < .05 was used to compare the change in score from baseline between groups.Results:A total of 41 patients over 3 years were included in the study: 21 in the ACI-C group and 20 in the AMIC group. All the patients had prior surgery to the index knee. At 2-year follow-up, the clinical scores for both groups improved significantly from baseline. No significant differences between groups were seen in the change from baseline for KOOS (AMIC, 18.1; ACI-C, 10.3), any of the KOOS subscales, the Lysholm score (AMIC, 19.7; ACI-C, 17.0), or the VAS pain score (AMIC, 30.6; ACI-C, 19.6). Two patients in the AMIC group had progressed to a total knee replacement by the 2-year follow-up as compared with none in the ACI-C group.Conclusion:At 2-year follow-up, no significant differences were found regarding outcomes between ACI-C and AMIC. Mid- and long-term results will be important.Registration:NCT01458782 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

No abstract

Many researchers world over are currently investigating the suitability of stromal cells harvested from foetal tissues for allogeneic cell transplantation therapies or for tissue engineering purposes. In this study, we have investigated the chondrogenic potential of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) isolated from whole sections of human umbilical cord or mixed cord (UCSCs-MC), and compared them with cells isolated from synovial membrane (SMSCs), Hoffa's fat pad (HFPSCs) and cartilage. All MSCs were positive for surface markers including CD73, CD90, CD105, CD44, CD146 and CD166, but negative for CD11b, CD19, CD34, CD45 and HLA-DR in addition to CD106 and CD271. Chondrogenic potential of all cell sources was studied using 3D pellet cultures incubated in the presence of different combinations of anabolic substances such as dexamethasone, IGF-1, TGF-β1, TGF-β3, BMP-2 and BMP-7. BMP-2 and dexamethasone in combination with TGF-β1 or TGF-β3 excelled at inducing chondrogenesis on SMSCs, HFPSCs and chondrocytes, as measured by glycosaminoglycans and collagen type II staining of pellets, quantitative glycosaminoglycan expression, quantitative PCR of cartilage signature genes and electron microscopy. In contrast, none of the tested growth factor combinations was sufficient to induce chondrogenesis on UCSCs-MC. Moreover, incubation of UCSCs-MC spheroids in the presence of cartilage pieces or synovial cells in co-cultures did not aid chondrogenic induction. In summary, we show that in comparison with MSCs harvested from adult joint tissues, UCSCs-MC display poor chondrogenic abilities. This observation should alert researchers at the time of considering UCSCs-MC as cartilage forming cells in tissue engineering or repair strategies.

IntroductionThe current evidence on the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after primary joint reconstruction is insufficient. In several European countries, the use of ALBC is routine practice unlike in the USA where ALBC use is not approved in low-risk patients. Therefore, we designed a double-blinded pragmatic multicentre register-based randomised controlled non-inferiority trial to investigate the effects of ALBC compared with plain bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).Methods and analysisA minimum of 9,172 patients undergoing full-cemented primary TKA will be recruited and equally randomised into the ALBC group and the plain bone cement group. This trial will be conducted in Norwegian hospitals that routinely perform cemented primary TKA. The primary outcome will be risk of revision surgery due to PJI at 1-year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be: risk of revision due to any reason including aseptic loosening at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; patient-related outcome measures like function, pain, satisfaction and health-related quality of life at 1, 6 and 10 years of follow-up; risk of changes in the microbial pattern and resistance profiles of organisms cultured in subsequent revisions at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; cost-effectiveness of routine ALBC versus plain bone cement use in primary TKA. We will use 1:1 randomisation with random permuted blocks and stratify by participating hospitals to randomise patients to receive ALBC or plain bone cement. Inclusion, randomisation and follow-up will be through the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Western Norway Regional Committees on Medical and Health Research Ethics (reference number: 2019/751/REK vest) on 21 June 2019. The findings of this trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT04135170.

No abstract

The location of osteoporotic fragility fractures adds crucial information to post‐fracture risk estimation. Triaging patients according to fracture site for secondary fracture prevention can therefore be of interest to prioritize patients considering the high imminent fracture risk. The objectives of this cross‐sectional study were therefore to explore potential differences between central (vertebral, hip, proximal humerus, pelvis) and peripheral (forearm, ankle, other) fractures. This substudy of the Norwegian Capture the Fracture Initiative (NoFRACT) included 495 women and 119 men ≥50 years with fragility fractures. They had bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine assessed using dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), trabecular bone score (TBS) calculated, concomitantly vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) with semiquantitative grading of vertebral fractures (SQ1–SQ3), and a questionnaire concerning risk factors for fractures was answered. Patients with central fractures exhibited lower BMD of the femoral neck (765 versus 827 mg/cm2), total hip (800 versus 876 mg/cm2), and lumbar spine (1024 versus 1062 mg/cm2); lower mean TBS (1.24 versus 1.28); and a higher proportion of SQ1‐SQ3 fractures (52.0% versus 27.7%), SQ2–SQ3 fractures (36.8% versus 13.4%), and SQ3 fractures (21.5% versus 2.2%) than patients with peripheral fractures (all p < 0.05). All analyses were adjusted for sex, age, and body mass index (BMI); and the analyses of TBS and SQ1–SQ3 fracture prevalence was additionally adjusted for BMD). In conclusion, patients with central fragility fractures revealed lower femoral neck BMD, lower TBS, and higher prevalence of vertebral fractures on VFA than the patients with peripheral fractures. This suggests that patients with central fragility fractures exhibit more severe deterioration of bone structure, translating into a higher risk of subsequent fragility fractures and therefore they should get the highest priority in secondary fracture prevention, although attention to peripheral fractures should still not be diminished. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

BackgroundThe aim was to investigate whether resident chondrocytes in human articular cartilage and in subculture express vitamin D receptor (VDR) and the enzyme that hydroxylates the prohormone 25(OH)D3 to the active hormone 1α,25(OH)2D3, namely 1α-hydroxylase (CYP27B1). Any putative effects of vitamin D on chondrocytes were also explored.MethodsCartilage from human osteoarthritic knee joints, cultured chondrocytes and cells grown in 3D spheroids were examined for the expression of VDR and 1α-hydroxylase by PCR, Western blots and immunolabelling. Receptor engagement was judged by visualizing nuclear translocation. The effects of 25(OH)D3 and 1α,25(OH)2D3 on chondrocyte functions were assessed in proliferation-, chondrogenesis- and cartilage signature-gene expression assays. The capability of chondrocytes to hydroxylate 25(OH)D3 was determined by measuring the concentration of metabolites. Finally, a putative regulation of receptor and enzyme expression by 1α,25(OH)2D3 or interleukin (IL)-1β, was investigated by Western blot.ResultsGene expression was positive for VDR in freshly isolated cells from native cartilage, cells subcultured in monolayers and in spheroids, whereas protein expression, otherwise judged low, was apparent in monolayers. Nuclear translocation of VDR occurred upon 1α,25(OH)2D3 treatment. Transcripts for 1α-hydroxylase were detected in freshly isolated cells, cultured cells and spheroids. Western blots and immunolabelling detected 1α-hydroxylase protein in all materials, while staining of tissue appeared confined to cells at the superficial layer. A dose-dependent 1α,25(OH)2D3 production was measured when the enzyme substrate was supplied to cell cultures. Western blots revealed that the VDR, but not 1α-hydroxylase, was induced by IL-1β treatment in adherent cells. Proliferation in monolayers was enhanced by both 25(OH)D3 and 1α,25(OH)2D3, and both compounds had negative effects on chondrogenesis and cartilage-matrix genes.ConclusionsVDR expression in resident cartilage chondrocytes, generally considered differentiated cells, is elusive. A similar pattern applies for redifferentiated chondrocytes in spheroid cultures, whereas dedifferentiated cells, established in monolayers, stably express VDR. Both 25(OH)D3 and 1α,25(OH)2D3 are able to potentiate cell proliferation but have a negative impact in proteoglycan synthesis. Chondrocytes express 1α-hydroxylase and may contribute to the production of 1α,25(OH)2D3 into the joint environment. Effects of vitamin D could be unfavourable in the context of cartilage matrix synthesis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-017-1791-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundAutologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) has been used over the last two decades to treat focal cartilage lesions aiming to delay or prevent the onset of osteoarthritis; however, some patients do not respond adequately to the procedure. A number of biomarkers that can forecast the clinical potency of the cells have been proposed, but evidence for the relationship between in vitro chondrogenic potential and clinical outcomes is missing. In this study, we explored if the ability of cells to make cartilage in vitro correlates with ACI clinical outcomes. Additionally, we evaluated previously proposed chondrogenic biomarkers and searched for new biomarkers in the chondrocyte proteome capable of predicting clinical success or failure after ACI.MethodsThe chondrogenic capacity of chondrocytes derived from 14 different donors was defined based on proteoglycans staining and visual histological grading of tissues generated using the pellet culture system. A Lysholm score of 65 two years post-ACI was used as a cut-off to categorise “success” and “failure” clinical groups. A set of predefined biomarkers were investigated in the chondrogenic and clinical outcomes groups using flow cytometry and qPCR. High-throughput proteomics of cell lysates was used to search for putative biomarkers to predict chondrogenesis and clinical outcomes.ResultsVisual histological grading of pellets categorised donors into “high” and “low” chondrogenic groups. Direct comparison between donor-matched in vitro chondrogenic potential and clinical outcomes revealed no significant associations. Comparative analyses of selected biomarkers revealed that expression of CD106 and TGF-β-receptor-3 was enhanced in the low chondrogenic group, while expression of integrin-α1 and integrin-β1 was significantly upregulated in the high chondrogenic group. Additionally, increased surface expression of CD166 was observed in the clinical success group, while the gene expression of cartilage oligomeric matrix protein was downregulated. High throughput proteomics revealed no differentially expressed proteins from success and failure clinical groups, whereas seven proteins including prolyl-4-hydroxylase 1 were differentially expressed when comparing chondrogenic groups.ConclusionIn our limited material, we found no correlation between in vitro cartilage-forming capacity and clinical outcomes, and argue on the limitations of using the chondrogenic potential of cells or markers for chondrogenesis as predictors of clinical outcomes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2380-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.