The role of Bone Tissue Engineering in the field of Regenerative Medicine has been the topic of substantial research over the past two decades. Technological advances have improved orthopaedic implants and surgical techniques for bone reconstruction. However, improvements in surgical techniques to reconstruct bone have been limited by the paucity of autologous materials available and donor site morbidity. Recent advances in the development of biomaterials have provided attractive alternatives to bone grafting expanding the surgical options for restoring the form and function of injured bone. Specifically, novel bioactive (second generation) biomaterials have been developed that are characterised by controlled action and reaction to the host tissue environment, whilst exhibiting controlled chemical breakdown and resorption with an ultimate replacement by regenerating tissue. Future generations of biomaterials (third generation) are designed to be not only osteoconductive but also osteoinductive, i.e. to stimulate regeneration of host tissues by combining tissue engineering and in situ tissue regeneration methods with a focus on novel applications. These techniques will lead to novel possibilities for tissue regeneration and repair. At present, tissue engineered constructs that may find future use as bone grafts for complex skeletal defects, whether from post-traumatic, degenerative, neoplastic or congenital/developmental "origin" require osseous reconstruction to ensure structural and functional integrity. Engineering functional bone using combinations of cells, scaffolds and bioactive factors is a promising strategy and a particular feature for future development in the area of hybrid materials which are able to exhibit suitable biomimetic and mechanical properties. This review will discuss the state of the art in this field and what we can expect from future generations of bone regeneration concepts.

A considerable number of international research groups as well as commercial entities work on the development of new bone grafting materials, carriers, growth factors and specifically tissue-engineered constructs for bone regeneration. They are strongly interested in evaluating their concepts in highly reproducible large segmental defects in preclinical and large animal models. To allow comparison between different studies and their outcomes, it is essential that animal models, fixation devices, surgical procedures and methods of taking measurements are well standardized to produce reliable data pools and act as a base for further directions to orthopaedic and tissue engineering developments, specifically translation into the clinic. In this leading opinion paper, we aim to review and critically discuss the different large animal bone defect models reported in the literature. We conclude that most publications provide only rudimentary information on how to establish relevant preclinical segmental bone defects in large animals. Hence, we express our opinion on methodologies to establish preclinical critically sized, segmental bone defect models used in past research with reference to surgical techniques, fixation methods and postoperative management focusing on tibial fracture and segmental defect models.

The reconstruction of large defects (>10 mm) in humans usually relies on bone graft transplantation. Limiting factors include availability of graft material, comorbidity, and insufficient integration into the damaged bone. We compare the gold standard autograft with biodegradable composite scaffolds consisting of medical-grade polycaprolactone and tricalcium phosphate combined with autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) or recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 7 (rhBMP-7). Critical-sized defects in sheep--a model closely resembling human bone formation and structure--were treated with autograft, rhBMP-7, or MSCs. Bridging was observed within 3 months for both the autograft and the rhBMP-7 treatment. After 12 months, biomechanical analysis and microcomputed tomography imaging showed significantly greater bone formation and superior strength for the biomaterial scaffolds loaded with rhBMP-7 compared to the autograft. Axial bone distribution was greater at the interfaces. With rhBMP-7, at 3 months, the radial bone distribution within the scaffolds was homogeneous. At 12 months, however, significantly more bone was found in the scaffold architecture, indicating bone remodeling. Scaffolds alone or with MSC inclusion did not induce levels of bone formation comparable to those of the autograft and rhBMP-7 groups. Applied clinically, this approach using rhBMP-7 could overcome autograft-associated limitations.

No abstract

No abstract