Histomorphometric analysis of different latency periods effect on new bone obtained by periosteal distraction: an experimental study in the rabbit model

Altuğ, Hasan Ayberk; Aydıntuğ, Yavuz Sinan; Şençimen, Metin; Günhan, Ömer; Ortakoğlu, Kerim; Bayar, Gürkan Raşit; Doğan, Necdet

doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.06.009

Cited by 21 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Histological observations corresponded to the previous findings for the given rate of PDO. 26,27 Uneven bone apposition on the old bone surface with blood vessels ingrowth was previously observed in rabbits using a distraction rate of 0.25 mm/24 h 26 and in rats using a rate of 0.1 mm/24 h. 28 Patch-wise bone formation was likely caused by the remnants of prominent coagulum, as they need to be resorbed before new bone is formed. 21 The absence of bone apposition observed in Group II might be caused by the higher rate of distraction performed that impaired the interaction between periosteum and the calvarial bone, important for the new bone apposition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…New cortical bone underneath the periosteum with irregular bone islets in the region of the gap was reported on the lateral surface of the rabbit's mandible using the same daily rate of distraction. 27,30 Despite the observed characteristics in bone formation, the BV during early observation period depended on the given time-point and not on the rate of distraction performed. These results corroborate the previous findings on static and dynamic periosteal elevation on the calvaria of minipigs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…16,18,27 On the contrary, fat tissue formation has not been observed in rats even when the contribution of periosteum was deliberately severed. 28 A compartment-specific anabolic response has been noticed on the periosteal progenitors from frontal and parietal bone; osteoblastic and adipogenic differentiation in these populations was influenced by embryonic lineage and developmental origin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gart and Vicari 19) also suggested a distraction rate of 1 mm per day. Another report proposed 0.25 mm twice a day 20) . The above rate is used in mandibular distraction.…”

Section: Histologic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Creation of a Rabbit Model of Rib Distraction Osteogenesis

Shen

Tang

Yang

et al. 2017

J. Hard Tissue Biology.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our study aimed to create a rabbit model of rib distraction osteogenesis, for use in treatment of rib defects and research on the process of distraction osteogenesis. Ten rabbits were subjected to unilateral osteotomy and a specific distractor was installed. The distractors were normally designed. Two rabbits died from anesthesia. Eight female rabbits underwent rib osteotomies, and lateral distraction devices were implanted. Three days postoperatively, distraction commenced on one side in each rabbit, by 0.5 mm twice a day for 80 days. Four rabbits each were sacrificed 15 and 30 days later, respectively, and the osteogenic and contralateral ribs were removed for histomorphometric examination. Normal development of distraction osteogenesis was observed, and the structure of newly formed bone was the same as that of other parts of the rib. Histomorphometric and gross tissue appearance of the areas subjected to distraction osteogenesis were the same as the other parts of the rib. We successfully established an animal model of rib distraction and documented the entire process of extension. Rib distraction was performed by 0.5 mm twice a day. Following a fixed period of 30 days, the biological characteristics of the distracted and contralateral normal rib showed no difference. Moreover, the distracted rib had curvature.

show abstract

“…[2][3][4][5][6][7] Distraction osteogenesis has the potential to overcome these disadvantages, and in addition can provide lengthening of soft tissue together with new bone. [5][6][7] Various techniques of distraction osteogenesis have been described with reasonable success rates, and in recent years the idea of osteogenesis by periosteal distraction for the treatment of bone deficiencies has also been suggested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%