scholarly journals Comparison of three imaging modalities used to evaluate bone healing after tibial tuberosity advancement in cranial cruciate ligament-deficient dogs and comparison of the effect of a gelatinous matrix and a demineralized bone matrix mix on bone healing – a pilot study

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marije Risselada ◽  
Matthew D. Winter ◽  
Daniel D. Lewis ◽  
Emily Griffith ◽  
Antonio Pozzi
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 232596711773451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam T. Hexter ◽  
Catherine Pendegrass ◽  
Fares Haddad ◽  
Gordon Blunn

Background: Following injury to the rotator cuff and anterior cruciate ligament, a direct enthesis is not regenerated, and healing occurs with biomechanically inferior fibrous tissue. Demineralized bone matrix (DBM) is a collagen scaffold that contains growth factors and is a promising biological material for tendon and ligament repair because it can regenerate a direct fibrocartilaginous insertion via endochondral ossification. Purpose: To provide a comprehensive review of the literature investigating the use of DBM to augment tendon-bone healing in tendon repair and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: Electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) were searched for preclinical and clinical studies that evaluated the use of DBM in tendon repair and ACLR. Search terms included the following: (“demineralized bone matrix” OR “demineralized cortical bone”) AND (“tissue scaffold” OR “tissue engineering” OR “ligament” OR “tendon” OR “anterior cruciate ligament” OR “rotator cuff”). Peer-reviewed articles written in English were included, and no date restriction was applied (searches performed February 10, 2017). Methodological quality was assessed with peer-reviewed scoring criteria. Results: The search strategy identified 339 articles. After removal of duplicates and screening according to inclusion criteria, 8 studies were included for full review (tendon repair, n = 4; ACLR, n = 4). No human clinical studies were identified. All 8 studies were preclinical animal studies with good methodological quality. Five studies compared DBM augmentation with non-DBM controls, of which 4 (80%) reported positive findings in terms of histological and biomechanical outcomes. Conclusion: Preclinical evidence indicates that DBM can improve tendon-bone healing, although clinical studies are lacking. A range of animal models of tendon repair and ACLR showed that DBM can re-create a direct fibrocartilaginous enthesis, although the animal models are not without limitations. Before clinical trials are justified, research is required that determines the best source of DBM (allogenic vs xenogenic) and the best form of DBM (demineralized cortical bone vs DBM paste) to be used in them.


Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 3120
Author(s):  
Nicolas Söhling ◽  
Maximilian Leiblein ◽  
Alexander Schaible ◽  
Maren Janko ◽  
Joachim Schwäble ◽  
...  

Treatment of large bone defects is one of the great challenges in contemporary orthopedic and traumatic surgery. Grafts are necessary to support bone healing. A well-established allograft is demineralized bone matrix (DBM) prepared from donated human bone tissue. In this study, a fibrous demineralized bone matrix (f-DBM) with a high surface-to-volume ratio has been analyzed for toxicity and immunogenicity. f-DBM was transplanted to a 5-mm, plate-stabilized, femoral critical-size-bone-defect in Sprague-Dawley (SD)-rats. Healthy animals were used as controls. After two months histology, hematological analyses, immunogenicity as well as serum biochemistry were performed. Evaluation of free radical release and hematological and biochemical analyses showed no significant differences between the control group and recipients of f-DBM. Histologically, there was no evidence of damage to liver and kidney and good bone healing was observed in the f-DBM group. Reactivity against human HLA class I and class II antigens was detected with mostly low fluorescence values both in the serum of untreated and treated animals, reflecting rather a background reaction. Taken together, these results provide evidence for no systemic toxicity and the first proof of no basic immunogenic reaction to bone allograft and no sensitization of the recipient.


2007 ◽  
Vol 128 (6) ◽  
pp. 621-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constantin Schizas ◽  
Dimitrios Triantafyllopoulos ◽  
Victor Kosmopoulos ◽  
Nikos Tzinieris ◽  
Kosmas Stafylas

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 378-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Beltrán ◽  
Wilfried Engelke ◽  
Ruth Prieto ◽  
Iván Valdivia-Gandur ◽  
Pablo Navarro ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 147-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Öztürk ◽  
H. Yetkin ◽  
L. Memis ◽  
E. Cila ◽  
S. Bolukbasi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document