Comparison of two protocols of periosteal distraction osteogenesis in a rabbit calvaria model

Abstract

The regenerative pathways during periosteal distraction osteogenesis may be influenced by the local environment composed by cells, growth factors, nutrition and mechanical load. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of two protocols of periosteal distraction on bone formation. Custom made distraction devices were surgically fixed onto the calvariae of 60 rabbits.After an initial healing period of 7 days, two groups of animals were submitted to distraction rates of 0.25 and 0.5 mm/24h for 10 days, respectively. Six animals per group were sacrificed 10 (middistraction), 17 (end-distraction), 24 (1-week consolidation), 31 (2-week consolidation) and 77 days (2-month consolidation) after surgery. Newly formed bone was assessed by means of micro-CT and histologically. Expression of transcripts encoding tissue-specific genes (BMP-2, RUNX2, ACP5, SPARC, collagen I α1, collagen II α1 and SOX9) was analyzed by quantitative PCR. Two patterns of bone formation were observed, originating from the old bone surface in Group I and from the periosteum in Group II. Bone volume and bone mineral density significantly increased up to the 2-month consolidation period within the groups (p <0.05). Significantly more bone was observed in Group II compared to Group I at the 2-month consolidation period (p <0.001). Expression of transcripts encoding osteogenic genes in bone depended on the time-point of observation (p <0.05).Low level of transcripts reveals an indirect role of periosteum in the osteogenic process. Two protocols of periosteal distraction in the present model resulted in moderate differences in terms of bone formation.

Comprehensive In Vitro Testing of Calcium Phosphate-Based Bioceramics with Orthopedic and Dentistry Applications

“…There are several animal models widely used for the assessment of HA substitutes on bone reconstruction (as reviewed in Reference [180]). For flat bone reconstruction, the most common is the calvarial defect model, which is frequently tested in small rodents: rat [181,182] and rabbits [183]. Long bone reconstruction uses a distraction osteogenesis model—a surgical model that creates a gap in a long bone (usually tibia), using continuous traction on the osteotomy ends.…”

Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis: An Effective Method for Bone Regeneration

“…Schmidt et al [7] then used a U-shaped distractor (Figure 1(b)) to stretch the periosteum of rabbit mandible and acquired new bone height of average 2.86 ± 0.56 mm, and the U-shaped distractor has been improved later [18, 21, 26, 33, 36, 40]. The U-shaped device is usually made of titanium alloy or stainless steel with advantages of high strength and corrosion resistance.…”

“…However, Saulacic et al [36] believed that the high speed of distraction might be beneficial to periosteal osteogenesis, although it was easy to cause the disruption of wound and exposure of the device. Zakaria et al [27, 28] designed a new type of device, by means of the inclined structure; this device could be used to study the effect of different distraction rates at the same time.…”

“…Another study [35] proved that the newly formed bone by PDO was more mature after adding platelet-rich fibrin (PRF). In addition, PDO could also induce the release of endogenous bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) [36]. We have reason to believe that adding other biological factors which can promote the osteogenesis of DO, such as TGF- β , bFGF, and PDGF, can also improve the osteogenesis of PDO.…”

Three-Dimensional-Printed Poly-L-Lactic Acid Scaffolds with Different Pore Sizes Influence Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis of a Rabbit Skull

“…This method could not regenerate enough bone tissue for the treatment of large bone defects because of the limited space. Then, a number of researchers have begun to study the PDO under the periosteum of the skull [37,38,[43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51]. The skull is flatter and more suitable for the placement of distraction devices; moreover, the periosteum of the skull is more robust and easier to separate compared with other positions.…”