Scaffold-cell bone engineering in a validated preclinical animal model: precursors vs differentiated cell source

Berner, Arne; Henkel, Janin; Woodruff, Maria A.; Saifzadeh, Siamak; Kirby, Giles T. S.; Zaiss, Sascha; Gohlke, Jan; Reichert, Johannes C.; Nerlich, Michael; Schuetz, Michael; Hutmacher, Dietmar W.

doi:10.1002/term.2104

Cited by 43 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the distribution of the newly formed bone in relation to the scaffolds (i.e. external, internal) can be quantified (Berner et al ., ). Saito et al .…”

Section: Bone Regeneration Xct Analysismentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Applications of X‐ray computed tomography for the evaluation of biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects

Fernández

Witte²,

Tozzi

2019

Journal of Microscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone as such displays an intrinsic regenerative potential following fracture; however, this capacity is limited with large bone defects that cannot heal spontaneously. The management of critical‐sized bone defects remains a major clinical and socioeconomic need with osteoregenerative biomaterials constantly under development aiming at promoting and enhancing bone healing. X‐ray computed tomography (XCT) has become a standard and essential tool for quantifying structure–function relationships in bone and biomaterials, facilitating the development of novel bone tissue engineering strategies. This paper presents recent advancements in XCT analysis of biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration. As a noninvasive and nondestructive technique, XCT allows for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of three‐dimensional (3D) scaffolds and biomaterial microarchitecture, bone growth into the scaffold as well as the 3D characterisation of biomaterial degradation and bone regeneration in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, in combination with in situ mechanical testing and digital volume correlation (DVC), XCT demonstrated its potential to better understand the bone–biomaterial interactions and local mechanics of bone regeneration during the healing process in relation to the regeneration achieved in vivo, which will likely provide valuable knowledge for the development and optimisation of novel osteoregenerative biomaterials. Lay Description Bone, being a dynamically adaptable material, displays excellent regenerative properties following fracture. However, the self‐healing capacity of bone becomes more difficult with large bone defects. Those defects are common and occur in many clinical situations; hence, biomaterials are mostly used to restore both bone structure and function in the defect site. X‐ray computed tomography (XCT) is a powerful tool to evaluate bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects after the implantation of biomaterials, allowing to an improved understanding of the regeneration process following different bone tissue engineering approaches. This paper focuses on recent advancements in XCT analysis to characterise biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects. XCT supports three‐dimensional (3D) analysis of biomaterials, scaffolds and regenerated bone microarchitecture, as well as bone ingrowth into the scaffold. As a nondestructive technique, XCT allows for a 3D characterisation of biomaterial degradation and bone regeneration over time. In addition, XCT combined with in situ mechanical experiments and digital volume correlation (DVC) provides a 3D evaluation and quantification of bone–biomaterial interactions and deformation mechanisms during the regeneration process. This remains essential for the development and enhancement of novel biomaterials able to produce bone that is comparable with the native tissue they aim to replace.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the distribution of the newly formed bone in relation to the scaffolds (i.e. external, internal) can be quantified (Berner et al ., ). Saito et al .…”

Section: Bone Regeneration Xct Analysismentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Moreover, the distribution of the newly formed bone in relation to the scaffolds (i.e. external, internal) can be quantified (Berner et al, 2017). Saito et al (2015), for example, showed the influence of scaffold porosity in bone ingrowth within polymeric scaffolds and the increase of bone penetration over time.…”

Section: Ex Vivo Analysis Of Bone Regenerationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of X‐ray computed tomography for the evaluation of biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects

Fernández

Witte²,

Tozzi

2019

Journal of Microscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two particular lines, MDA PCa 118a and MDA PCa 118b, were established as subcutaneous PDXs, providing a model of androgen-independent prostate cancer that induces a robust osteoblastic reaction in bonelike matrix and soft tissue (Li et al 2008). Improvements to bone metastatic PDXs include recent modifications using scaffold/matrices (Talukdar et al 2011;Holzapfel et al 2013Holzapfel et al , 2014Berner et al 2015) coupled with better imaging modalities to investigate the tumor biology (Tse et al 2015).…”

Section: Patient-derived Preclinical Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preclinical Models of Prostate Cancer: Patient-Derived Xenografts, Organoids, and Other Explant Models

Risbridger

Toivanen

Taylor

2018

Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostate cancer remains a lethal disease. Preclinical cancer models that accurately represent the tumors of the patients they are intended to help are necessary to test potential therapeutic approaches and to better translate research discoveries. However, research in the prostate cancer field is hampered by the limited number of human cell lines and xenograft models, most of which do not recapitulate the human disease seen in the clinic today. This work reviews the recent advances in human patient-derived xenograft, organoid, and other explant models to address this need. In contrast to other tumor streams, the prostate cancer field is challenged by this approach, yet despite the limitations, patient-derived models remain an integral component of the preclinical testing pathway leading to better treatments for men with prostate cancer.

show abstract

“…Bone tissue engineering is an alternative solution for the repair of large bone defects, by providing a template to guide hard tissue regeneration. The standard tissue engineering approach includes the use of scaffolds, mesenchymal stem cells and growth factors, called the triangular concept, which will offer a bridging material guiding the regeneration of the new tissue [6,7]. Scaffolds used in bone regeneration are broadly classified into biological, mineral such as glass and ceramic materials and polymer scaffolds.…”

Section: Abstract: Bioactive Glass Regeneration Of Bone Defects Adimentioning

confidence: 99%

Regeneration of Bone Defects Using Bioactive Glass Combined with Adipose-derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells. An experimental in vivo study

Trâmbiţaş¹,

Pop²,

Miron³

et al. 2019

Rev. Chim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large bone defects are a medical concern as these are often unable to heal spontaneously, based on the host bone repair mechanisms. In their treatment, bone tissue engineering techniques represent a promising approach by providing a guide for osseous regeneration. As bioactive glasses proved to have osteoconductive and osteoinductive properties, the aim of our study was to evaluate by histologic examination, the differences in the healing of critical-sized calvarial bone defects filled with bioactive glass combined with adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells, compared to negative controls. We used 16 male Wistar rats subjected to a specific protocol based on which 2 calvarial bone defects were created in each animal, one was filled with Bon Alive S53P4 bioactive glass and adipose-derived stem cells and the other one was considered control. At intervals of one week during the following month, the animals were euthanized and the specimens from bone defects were histologically examined and compared. The results showed that this biomaterial was biocompatible and the first signs of osseous healing appeared in the third week. Bone Alive S53P4 bioactive glass could be an excellent bone substitute, reducing the need of bone grafts.

show abstract

Scaffold-cell bone engineering in a validated preclinical animal model: precursors vs differentiated cell source

Cited by 43 publications

References 17 publications

Applications of X‐ray computed tomography for the evaluation of biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects

Applications of X‐ray computed tomography for the evaluation of biomaterial‐mediated bone regeneration in critical‐sized defects

Preclinical Models of Prostate Cancer: Patient-Derived Xenografts, Organoids, and Other Explant Models

Regeneration of Bone Defects Using Bioactive Glass Combined with Adipose-derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells. An experimental in vivo study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About