Synergistic Effects of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor on Bone Morphogenetic Proteins Induced Bone Formation In Vivo: Influencing Factors and Future Research Directions

Li, Bo; Wang, Hai; Qiu, Guixing; X, Su; Wu, Zhihong

doi:10.1155/2016/2869572

Cited by 61 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 111 publications

(157 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…TCTP and VEGF up regulated DSPP expression on day 1 and BMP-2 expression on day 1 and day 3, which supports that both proteins can promote pulp cells differentiation, especially in TCTP/VEGF supplemented in HEMA-treated pulp cells. A recent study revealed that VEGF may have synergist effect to BMPs, including on cell survival and mineralization (23). Further investigation may be required concerning the potential connection of the two mechanisms protecting cell death and differentiation, since both VEGF and TCTP had anticytotoxicity and promoted cell differentiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor and translationally controlled tumor protein on 2‑hydroxyethyl methacrylate‑treated pulp cells

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A is a potential signaling protein that may promote angiogenesis. VEGF also helps cells survive in stressfull or hazardous conditions. The present study aimed to compare the effect of VEGF with translationally controlled tumor protein (TCTP), an anti‑apoptotic protein in human dental pulp cells (HDPCs), following exposure to 2‑hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), which is a major residual monomer from resin restorative dental materials. Cell viability, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, mineralization and gene expressions for odontogenic and osteogenic differentiation markers of HDPCs were investigated, following exposure to HEMA and in combination with TCTP and VEGF. The results revealed that TCTP at 1 ng/ml and VEGF at 10 ng/ml significantly promoted the proliferation of HDPCs (P<0.05). TCTP (1 ng/ml) and VEGF (10 ng/ml) maintained the cell viability of 4 mM HEMA‑treated cells at the same percentage as the control. However, cells treated with HEMA+TCTP+VEGF had a lower cell viability than the groups treated with HEMA and TCTP or VEGF alone. TCTP and VEGF promoted cell proliferation, ALP activity and mineralization, and upregulated of DSPP, DMP‑1, BMP‑2, and ALP mRNA expression compared with the control. Furthermore, the HEMA+TCTP and HEMA+VEGF groups had significantly higher percentages of calcium deposition than HEMA‑treated cells (P<0.001). HEMA was cytotoxic to HDPCs, reduced ALP activity and caused the significant downregulation of odontogenic and osteogenic gene expressions (P<0.05). It was concluded that VEGF and TCTP promoted pulp cell growth and the survival of HEMA‑treated cells without synergistic effects. TCTP was required in lower concentrations for these effects. VEGF and TCTP enhanced cell differentiation and mineralization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor and translationally controlled tumor protein on 2‑hydroxyethyl methacrylate‑treated pulp cells

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Blood supply is undoubtedly the absolute goal for any tissue engineering manipulation of the musculoskeletal system and osteonecrotic bone[ 22 , 31 ]. It is well understood that the reconstruction of the local microcirculation is prerequisite for effective bone regeneration[ 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, considerable effort, using in vitro and in vivo models including animal models, has been directed towards understanding the effect of growth factors and transcription factors on bone resorption and formation. Through the last decades it was well established that VEGF is a crucial part of the wide network of the molecules regulating osteoinduction on the femoral head like BMPs, leptin, hypoxia - inducible factor (HIF) and their target genes[ 22 - 25 ]. Under these considerations, an experimental model of cryosurgically-induced ONFH in canines was used to assess the power of our hypothesis that VEGF could be a crucial therapeutic factor for bone tissue remodeling and reversal of osseous degradation during the treatment of ON.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vascular endothelial growth factor for the treatment of femoral head osteonecrosis: An experimental study in canines

Dailiana

Stefanou

Khaldi

et al. 2018

WJO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIMTo evaluate the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) with the use of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).METHODSIn 30 mature beagles (6 groups of 5 beagles) ONFH was induced cryosurgically and one of the following solutions was administered locally in the femoral head (FH) in each group: Single injection of 500 μg VEGF (t-VEGFμ group); single injection of 500 ng VEGF (t-VEGFn group); continuous delivery of 500 μg VEGF through osmotic micropump (t-VEGFpump-μ group); continuous delivery of 500 ng VEGF through osmotic micropump (t-VEGFpump-n group); single injection of 0.9% sodium chloride (t-NS group), while one group that served as control group did not receive any local solution (No-t group). FHs were retrieved 12 wk postoperatively, underwent decalcification and hematoxylin/eosin and toluidine blue staining. In two canines per group, one half of FH was processed without decalcification and stained with modified Masson Trichrome. Histological sections were observed by light microscopy and measured with a semi-automatized bone histomorphometry system and Bone Volume/Total Volume (BV/TV), Marrow Volume/Total Volume (MaV/TV), and Trabecular Thickness (TbTh) were assessed. Standard and robust tests (Welch, Brown Forsythe) of analysis of variance along with multiple comparisons, were carried out among the categories.RESULTSThe untreated (No-t) group had signs of osteonecrosis, whereas the VEGF groups revealed reversal of the osteonecrosis. Statistical analysis of the decalcified specimens revealed a significantly better BV/TV ratio and a higher TbTh between the VEGF treatment groups (except the t-VEGFn group) and the No-t group or the control t-NS group. Single dose 500 μgVEGF group had significantly better BV/TV ratio and higher TbTh when compared to the No-t group (50.45 ± 6.18 vs 29.50 ± 12.27, P = 0.002 and 151.44 ± 19.07 vs 107.77 ± 35.15, P = 0.161 respectively) and the control t-NS group (50.45 ± 6.18 vs 30.9 ± 6.67, P = 0.004 and 151.44 ± 19.07 vs 107.14 ± 35.71, P = 0.151 respectively). Similar differences were found for the prolonged VEGF delivery/pump groups of 500 μg and 500 ng. Analysis of the totality of specimens (decalcified/non-decalcified) enhanced the aforementioned differences and additionally revealed significant differences in the comparison of the TbTh.CONCLUSIONIn an experimental model of ONFH in canines it was found that local treatment with VEGF leads to bone tissue remodeling and new bone formation.

show abstract

“…VEGF is highly expressed by endothelial progenitor cells at sites of bone healing and this is thought to be an important mechanism stimulating angiogenesis and facilitate the commencement of bone repair (Hu & Olsen, ). VEFG has been shown to potentiate the bone‐forming capacity of BMPs (Cui, Dighe, & Irvine, ), but these synergistic effects have not been observed consistently (Li, Wang, Qiu, Su, & Wu, ).…”

Section: Biologic Factors In Bone Formation and Regenerationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mesenchymal stem cells and biologic factors leading to bone formation

Bartold

Gronthos

Haynes

et al. 2019

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Physiological bone formation and bone regeneration occurring during bone repair can be considered distinct but similar processes. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and associated biologic factors are crucial to both bone formation and bone regeneration. Aim To perform a narrative review of the current literature regarding the role of MSC and biologic factors in bone formation with the aim of discussing the clinical relevance of in vitro and in vivo animal studies. Methods The literature was searched for studies on MSC and biologic factors associated with the formation of bone in the mandible and maxilla. The search specifically targeted studies on key aspects of how stem cells and biologic factors are important in bone formation and how this might be relevant to bone regeneration. The results are summarized in a narrative review format. Results Different types of MSC and many biologic factors are associated with bone formation in the maxilla and mandible. Conclusion Bone formation and regeneration involve very complex and highly regulated cellular and molecular processes. By studying these processes, new clinical opportunities will arise for therapeutic bone regenerative treatments.

show abstract

Synergistic Effects of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor on Bone Morphogenetic Proteins Induced Bone Formation In Vivo: Influencing Factors and Future Research Directions

Cited by 61 publications

References 111 publications

Effect of recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor and translationally controlled tumor protein on 2‑hydroxyethyl methacrylate‑treated pulp cells

Effect of recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor and translationally controlled tumor protein on 2‑hydroxyethyl methacrylate‑treated pulp cells

Vascular endothelial growth factor for the treatment of femoral head osteonecrosis: An experimental study in canines

Mesenchymal stem cells and biologic factors leading to bone formation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About