Relationship of donor site to chondrogenic potential of periosteum in vitro

Abstract

Periosteum has been shown in vitro and in vivo to have a chondrogenic potential that permits it to be used for cartilage regeneration. A useful donor site should have good chondrogenic potential, availability of a large quantity of periosteum, and relative ease of access, and it should be associated with a low rate of morbidity. We hypothesized that the chondrogenic potential of periosteum varies from one bone to another and among different regions of the periosteum from a single bone. A total of 370 periosteal and 37 fascia lata (control) explants were taken from the skull, the ilium, the scapula, the upper, middle, and lower medial proximal tibia, the posterior proximal tibia, and the distal tibia of 2-month-old New Zealand rabbits. The explants were cultured for 6 weeks in agarose/Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium to which 10 ng/ml of transforming growth factor-beta 1 was added during the first 2 weeks. Skeletal muscle and fascia lata were used as controls. In addition, the thickness, cell density, and total cell count of the cambium layer were measured in 24 explants from the donor sites on the ilium and the upper, middle, and lower proximal tibia. At 6 weeks, histomorphometry and quantitative collagen typing were performed. The periosteal donor sites could be grouped into three categories according to chondrogenic potential: ilium (best), scapula and tibia, and skull (no chondrogenesis). The scapular periosteum was slightly better than that from the tibia. Within the tibia, the upper and middle zones of the proximal region were similar and were slightly better than the lower proximal tibia or the distal tibia. The cellularity of the cambium layer correlated positively with the amount of cartilage as a percentage of the total area. The results of this study indicate that iliac periosteum exhibited the best overall chondrogenic potential in vitro but that periosteum from the traditionally used medial proximal tibia also was excellent. Periosteum from the skull was not chondrogenic. The chondrogenic potential of periosteum varies from bone to bone and within the periosteum from one bone. This variation in chondrogenic potential among donor sites may be due to a difference in the total cell count of the cambium layer.

Serum‐free media for periosteal chondrogenesis in vitro

“…Periosteum transplanted into a joint has the potential to repair articular defects with hyaline-like cartilage [32,37,38,42,. This same chondrogenic potential can be demonstrated in vitro [15,30,35,36,42,56,57]. However, the standard organ culture model to date involving whole explants of periosteum has required the addition of fetal bovine serum to the media.…”

“…Experimental models involving cell or tissue culture of chondrocytes or chondrogenic cells have demonstrated the feasibility of growing cartilage in vitro. These include, but are not limited to, the use of chondrocytes [3,16,17], mesenchymal stem cells [ 18, 19,67] and whole tissues such as periosteum [ 15,30,35,36,42,56,57] or perichondrium [1, 2,5,7,[9][10][11][12]21,46,47,50,58,59,65] genesis. Many of these systems have relied on the use of fetal bovine serum in the medium.…”

Human Periosteum Is a Source of Cells for Orthopaedic Tissue Engineering: A Pilot Study

“…Factors influencing cell phenotype include sex steroids [41,43], endogenous growth factors [26,45] and mechanical loading environment in vivo [27,42], and isolation [30], culture methods [8,13,20,31,37] and the donor site [14] in vitro. Lim [24] identified potential precursor populations within periosteal cultures.…”

“…Lim [24] identified potential precursor populations within periosteal cultures. Previous studies have identified stem cell markers in single isolates [24] and noted chondrogenesis in pellet cultures [14]. Further knowledge of the putative mesenchymal precursor cells in the periosteum could aid understanding of bone formation and fracture healing in vivo.…”

Osteoblastic differentiation of periosteum‐derived cells is promoted by the physical contact with the bone matrix in vivo

“…Cultured cells derived from the periosteum exhibit osteoblastic differentiation in the presence of ascorbic acid and 1,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3 in vitro (Fang and Hall, 1996;Koshihara et al, 1989;Tenenbaum et al, 1986). Periosteal explants or cells derived from the periosteum loaded in diffusion chambers or combined with porous ceramics showed the osteogenic potential in implantation experiments in vivo (Breitbart et al, 1998;Gally et al, 1994;Jaroma and Ritsila, 1988;Nakahara et al, 1990aNakahara et al, , 1991. The studies in vitro and in vivo described above suggest that periosteal cells contain subsets of progenitor cells that possess the potential to differentiate to osteoblasts.…”