Bone Regeneration - Science topic

Bioglass material is composed of minerals that occur naturally in the body (SiO2, Ca, Na2O, H, and P), and the molecular proportions of the calcium and phosphorous oxides are similar to those in the bones.

One common use of calcium phosphate compounds is in the field of biomedical engineering, where they are used as biomaterials for bone grafts, dental implants, and other medical devices. Information about the various calcium phosphate compounds used for different purposes can be found in a variety of sources, including:

Scientific journals and articles: Research articles in scientific journals often describe the properties and applications of specific calcium phosphate compounds. Some journals that frequently publish research related to calcium phosphate compounds include Biomaterials, Acta Biomaterialia, and Journal of Biomedical Materials Research.

Textbooks and reference books: Textbooks and reference books on biomaterials or materials science may provide information on the various types of calcium phosphate compounds and their properties and applications.

It is important to note that the specific calcium phosphate compounds used for a particular application may depend on various factors, such as the desired properties of the material, the intended use, and regulatory requirements.

Hereby I have attached one of the reference paper

Thank you!!

i guess you need to mail the company to provide all these details.

they should be happy to share if there is any concrete data on that matter

The choice must be according to the intended application, taking into account desired characteristics and limitations to be considered.

The biomechanics of the hydrogel will also make an impact on the degree of regeneration. For example, if the gels are softer ie., stiffness of the gel (compression modulus) is somewhere around 10kPa - 100kPa (kilopascal), bone regeneration will not take place. The gel should have a compression modulus in MPa (mega pascal) range for bone regeneration.

If you are expecting the host cells to infiltrate and populate your gel, it is essential you provide them with appropriate mechanical stimulus along with growth factor/drug. if you provide appropriate stimulus, theoretically osteoblasts will infiltrate the gel, deposit the bone ECM such as calcium, collagen etc and regenerate the bone tissue. (provided that your gel is biocompatible and does not cause immune reaction/capsule formation)

Hope this helps

Dear Amir Hossein Bahmanpour

Thanks a bunch for your answer. A hybrid scaffold seems to be so much exciting and it really brightened up my mind, thanks for that, but I suppose designing a scaffold which presents both characteristics of hydrogel and a 3D printed would be a challenge indeed, though I think it worth trying as well :)

Dear researcher

It is better to check the cell attachments by SEM.

yes;

Usually 6 months after grafting is the wait before the movement of teeth. Consulting with a periodontist is necessary to make sure that the graft has healed properly before tooth movement can be undertaken.

Hi everyone. Thanks for your contributions. Please Muruganandan, can you please send some references supporting your affirmation? I am working with a computacional model that is strongly based on your claim and the results seem to be correct. Many tahnks,

Also check https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26915044/

Take a look at this paper Holzer et al. (2020) "Immunological response in cynomolgus macaques to porcine α‐1,3 galactosyltransferase knockout viable skin xenotransplants—A pre‐clinical study" as well as at other papers from the Xenotransplantation journal.

Dear Wang, i found your question very interesting as my own research interest is osteoporosis. In future, i would also like to work on some project related to it. However, for now i found very interesting article hope it would be of some help

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010854518304211

Regards

Dr Saba Tariq

Some commercial companies have manual dilators or distractor-type expanders, or small distractors can properly be used, always taking into consideration and tomographic study the type, quality, shape and quantity of bone.

Hi Dr. Yu, thanks. I just checked Creative Biogene's portal and yes they are providing a number of transfected stable cell lines and other valuable products which obviously will help us. Thanks.

Dear Satish Narula,

For initial post implantation, you might see the fracture line of the recipient's bone and the material. You can differ it based on the opacity, and also based on the materials too. Different materials may be seen different in opacity. For longer period, the graft will gradually assimilate with the recipient's bone while remodeling phase is occuring and you may not see the fracture line anymore.

To the best of my knowledge the strongest evidence supports the use of amoxicillin in those patients who can take amoxicillin as a prophylactic antibiotic which, when used appropriately, results in a decreased infection rate and an increased Osseo integration rate. Indeed there are other antibiotics that have been tried, clindamycin is probably the second most prominent antibiotic used in an effort to promote Osseo integration and yet with clindamycin there have been mixed results, if I had to do the mental systematic review I would suggest that clindamycin is more likely to result in a failure of the implant but this would be with far fewer study numbers than with amoxicillin. It could be that clindamycin is used in higher risk situations. I would suggest that we do not at this point have definitive answers with either of these but the amoxicillin is closer to a definitive answer as a promoter of Osseo integration then is: the clindamycin as a negative towards Osseo integration.

If we are talking about materials that we can add to the implant or to the osteotomy or to the patient in general then were probably looking primarily at the antibiotics. There may well be some medications that patients can take that shows some positive and some negative results. you can probably sit down and add materials to the list of positive or negative factors. I would suggest that there is no absolute improvement from any or degradation from any additional compounds. This is not to say that we don't see articles that promote bisphosphonates or the promote the use of strontium or hydroxyapatite or nanoparticles deposition of Other different chemicals. It's just that none of these seem to be absolutes.

Dear Margarita,

I have the following opinion (which definitely is arguable!): Tissue engineering of bone grafts is only needed for volumetric sized defects - small defects in vivo will heal without artificial treatment. Volumetric sized grafts need to support nutrient supply and vascularization not just at the interface of bone graft and defect, but especially within the center of the tissue engineered construct. For that purpose, an interconnected pore network should be designed within the biomaterial. In case of hydrogels, pores might collapse due to swelling of the polymer, and therefore swelling behaviour is crucial for the success of bone healing. It definitely might be from interest not just to measure the mass swelling, but also the volume of the pores over time.

However, as I said, that is just an opinion and open for discussion. One also should consider that swelling is an indicator for scaffold degradation which is also needed for regenerative therapies.

Hello Leonardo. The Hard Tissue Research Unit of our College is particularly experienced at bone histomorphometry, using state of the art analytical tools. We work extensively with the Senckenberg Research Institute just across the river. http://www.senckenberg.de/root/index.php?page_id=16569

Contact me at tim.bromage@nyu.edu if you decide to move forward.

Tim

Dear Heba,

This article will help you.

Best wishes for your work

Regards

Dr Saba

Hi Heba,

Yes, definitely you can use other cell types. If you have the chance of working with mouse cells, I can suggest the preosteoblast MC3T3-E1 cell line. These cells can grow in α-MEM with 2mM Glutamine, 10% FBS, and 1% antibiotic solution (growth medium). You can differentiate them into osteoblasts if you culture them in differentiation medium (we were using the growth medium supplemented with 10 mM b-glycerol phosphate and 50 ug/mL ascorbic acid). Then, you can perform PCR, measure ALP activity and osteocalcin or perform Alizarin Red or Von Kossa stainings. You can check our papers if you want to have more info: and . This paper is a good example on characterization of differentiation in these cells: . I never worked with human cell lines, however, you may check this paper to give some ideas: . I hope this info helps. Good luck with your experiments!

Can anyone suggest the Catalog number for the kit from sigma? Anyone suggest a cell line or this? I'm looking to set up a model for bone health, but I can't get my hands on Saos-2 cells.

After telescopic rod in femoral or tibial deformity correction with osteotomy, to prevent secondary early displacement in rotation we apply a pelvic or femoral podalic cast (not circular)  for the first 2 weeks, with excellent results and compliance

Hi Leonardo, Bone healing will depend on your model, so if you are doing a skull defect, bone will regenerate depending on the size of the defect and type of scaffold/growth factors you are using. In general, after 4 weeks you should see bone formation. I suggest you to do 4, 6 and 8 weeks.

The rapid formation of the callus makes it an example of woven bone: low mineralization and poor lamellar organization. Compared to cortical bone, one can be confident that elastic modulus is reduced and likely yield strength is as well.

See: Leong, P.L. and Morgan, E.F., 2008. Measurement of fracture callus material properties via nanoindentation. Acta biomaterialia, 4(5), pp.1569-1575.

I agree with Peer on all accounts. If you use the calvaria, only go for 2. However, considering what you are testing, this is not the ideal model. I would go with minipigs. 

Dear Leonardo,

The effect of anaesthetic gets normalized between the controls and treatment groups as the procedure is repeated the same way for all groups. In addition, you can also have another control that does not undergo the DCE-MRI and therefore did not receive any fentanyl/propofol but is directly sacrificed for ex-vivo micro-CT. You can compare the CT values between the fentanyl/propofol exposed group and the no fentanyl/propofol group to identify if there is any marked difference between the two groups.

No but Dr Matzner does! michael.matzner@meduniwien.ac.at

Привет, Наташа! Конечно! Но как то нет ничего...

thanks to both of you!

I will immediately read the articles and let you know 

The best thing is autologous bone graft from calvarium, with minimal rate of absorption.I have done many with little absorption.

Regards

Thanks Oleksiy,

I considered that bone structure in cortical and spongy bone with image processing in mimics software, then I extract cortical bone and spongy bone geometry from these model. afterward I insert cortical bone in Catia software and instead spongy bone, I modeled that spongy bone geometry to solid body which bone remodeling start from that. and next when I Imported this Geometries to Comsol multiphysics software I don't know what boundary conditions must give to this geometry (spongy bone which is modeled in solid body) that considered bone and Interaction Implant contain TiO2 nano tubes ?

If you mean software for histological evaluation, Image-Pro Plus is perfect

It may be usefull http://www.jendodon.com/article/S0099-2399(14)00962-5/abstract

If there was one material that works for all most of the bone substitute companies growing exponentially would be out of business. The answer is complex since there are different indications for different materials depending on the procedure,location and other factors.The ultimate goal is getting vital bone resembling patient's own bone and therefore resorbable materials such as allografts and alloplasts are prefered.On the other hand in order to avoid shrinkage and resorption non resorbable materials are used like xenografts.These materials are used as a superficial layer or mixed with the resorbable ones.In sinuses we know all materials work...so there is no clinical difference.

What is the name of this gel that you're using to obtain a " membrane " ?

Chantarawaratit P, Sangvanich P, Banlunara W, Soontornvipart K, Thunyakitpisal P. Acemannan sponges stimulate alveolar bone, cementum and periodontal ligament regeneration in a canine class II furcation defect model. Journal of Periodontal Research. 2014;49(2):164-178

Other studies are also available in the llt. mostly animal experiments

Dear Saurav

Now there are lot of techniques to assess the regeneration,among which MRI cell viability test which uses gadolinium can tag regenerated tissue.

This article by my former colleague, Gongfa Chen, might give you a good start:

Chen, G., G. Pettet, M. Pearcy and D. L. S. McElwain (2007). "Comparison of two numerical approaches for bone remodelling." Med Eng Phys 29(1): 134-139.

Gongfa developed the method that I use (for modelling fracture healing), and I'm writing up a technical paper at present. If you can't get everything you need from Gongfa's paper, though (or can't access it), I'll be happy to discuss further.

Also please note that the ABAQUS manual (the "User Subroutines" section) gives you the basic framework you'll need for each routine - URDFIL, UFIELD, USDFLD, and UMAT. (You might not need all of those, depending on your model).

And one more point to note is that you'll need to edit the input (.inp) file manually, if you're building your model in ABAQUS CAE. You can do this in CAE, via "edit keywords". This will let you put in initial values for any state variables or field variables, and tell the analysis to output the state and field variables to the results file (.fil). The advantage of using the results file (via URDFIL) is that you only get the results once an increment is complete - ie you get the results for all elements at once, upon completion, rather than one element at a time, for every iteration.

Or, if you can give me your email address...

Mine is algilb@gmail.com

The Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Biolase Technologies) cuts hard and soft tissue. It primarily targets tissue that contains water or hydroxyapatit and also use for the treatment of periodontal pockets. So it is better to use laser to give better healing result and outcomes.

Buenas noches Alfredo:

Quiero hacerle una aclaración, el Ranelato de Estroncio, parece ser que tenia un efecto dual, catabólico/anabólico y aunque su mecanismo de acción no es suficientemente conocido, se ha utilizado durante años en el tratamiento de la OP en Europa, (su uso no fué aprobado por la FDA en EUA, y en Europa, donde si se aprobó, se ha emitido actualmente una alerta de efectos secundarios cardivasculares, por lo que tanto la EMA como la AEMPS en España, han limitado su uso).

En cuanto a Romosozumab, el estudio fue liderado por el Dr. Michael R. McClung, MD, del "Oregon Osteoporosis Center”, en Portland, Oregon, EUA.

Le adjunto tres referencias bibliográficas:

1. McClung MR, Grauer A, Boonen S, et al. Romosozumab in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:412-420. Abstract

2. Study to determine the efficacy and safety of romosozumab in the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01631214 Accessed February 3, 2014.

3. Fuente Primaria: “American Society for Bone and Mineral Research”

Referencia: "Inhibition of sclerostin with AMG 785 in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density: phase 2 trial results". McClung M, et al. ASBMR 2012; Abstract 1025.

Le reitero mi disponibilidad para informarle en todo lo que me sea posible.

Un cordial saludo.

Hi,

qPCR will give you quantitative data (if designed properly, it is very robust, especially when comparisons are needed), and this is extremely important, as most biological analyses are only semiquantitative, if at all. But qPCR is not enough, as you don't know how the protein behaves, so next thing will be doing Western, that will give you semiquantitative data on the protein of interest. I think immuhistochemistry is the least reliable method, the interpretation of the results could be subjective, and besides nice pictures, in many cases it will not give you really useful data, even w/o going into deeps like rounds of optimizations that could be required to get optimal staining (such as fixation procedures, antigen demasking, ab concentrations etc.). Good luck!

Think of using Masson-Goldner stain, this kind og tri-chrome staining distinguishes between collagen, osteoid and mineralized tissue at early stagies of tissue formation. It is good applicable for non-decalcified technovit embedded sections. Good luck!

I suggest to ask Prof. Arndt Schilling (TU München) for suitable markers. OPN and OC as suggested above by Sarita are good suggestions maybe also Collagen 1 alpha. Beside that it may be useful to look for inflammation markers (which should decline when the bone/implant interface stabilizes).

Mathieu, as a hyperbaric physician with many years experience and an interest in the trauma and bone healing literature, I agree with your proposals. It is a very limited version of clinical practice if we regard only higher rated human research in making our decisions - whilst the search for human evidence is critical, in some areas, the findings of well designed surgical animal studies can be very translatable to human outcomes. I suspect this may apply to bone healing in the mandible but this is not definite. It is far from clear to me whether HBO on its own is worth providing to an implant failure patient in the absence of radiation damage. There may be a case if there is some degree of bone infection present, but if not, I would advocate holding HBO until after debridement or placement of a new implant if there are particular reasons to think that additional "insurance" is needed after the procedure. An important caution from some of the animal studies is that there seems to be potential for ingrowth of fibrous tissue into a bone defect if it is not filled with either bone graft material or covered by a periosteal or synthetic membrane.

Dear Alberto, it is a fact that, at the state of knowledge, the absence of an universally accepted measurement method, able to assess the degree of defect correction and the three-dimensional stability over time of the augmented bone, still prevent clinicians to draw significant conclusions about the long-term clinical success of the different augmentation procedures.

Of course, neither open flap caliper measurements nor CT scan can be considered feasible routine methods of monitoring bone stability over time, because of their unreasonable economical and biological costs.

I fully agree with Dr Kashi that “bone sounding” is the technique with the best cost-benefit ratio, but - as rightly pointed out Dr Nakamai about the angulation of the caliper- the reproducibility of position may be an issue, for any chosen instrument for measuring . This problem - for bone sounding - may be partly overcome by using a template customized on the basis of final restoration and pierced at some buccal and lingual/palatal points at each implant site. In this way the holes guide the endo files during bone sounding in a reproducible position and angle, allowing the long-term evaluation of the horizontal stability of the augmented bone.

In this regard, if you think it might worthwhile, please view the article

Horizontal and vertical ridge augmentation in localized alveolar deficient sites: a retrospective case series. Implant dentistry. 06/2012; 21(3):175-85

available at : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225054009_Horizontal_and_vertical_ridge_augmentation_in_localized_alveolar_deficient_sites_a_retrospective_case_series