Comparing the efficacy of syngeneic iliac and femoral allografts with iliac crest autograft in a rat model of lumbar spinal fusion.
Allografts
Animals
Autografts
Bone Marrow Cells
/ physiology
Bone Transplantation
/ methods
Cells, Cultured
Disease Models, Animal
Feasibility Studies
Female
Femur
/ transplantation
Ilium
/ transplantation
Lumbar Vertebrae
/ diagnostic imaging
Osteogenesis
Rats, Inbred Lew
Spinal Fusion
/ methods
Stem Cells
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Allograft
Animal model
Autograft
Bone marrow cells
Spinal fusion
Journal
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
ISSN: 1749-799X
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Surg Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265112
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Sep 2020
15 Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
05
05
2020
accepted:
31
08
2020
entrez:
16
9
2020
pubmed:
17
9
2020
medline:
22
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Despite widespread use of femoral-sourced allografts in clinical spinal fusion procedures and the increasing interest in using femoral reamer-irrigator-aspirator (RIA) autograft in clinical bone grafting, few studies have examined the efficacy of femoral grafts compared to iliac crest grafts in spinal fusion. The objective of this study was to directly compare the use of autologous iliac crest with syngeneic femoral and iliac allograft bone in the rat model of lumbar spinal fusion. Single-level bilateral posterolateral intertransverse process lumbar spinal fusion surgery was performed on Lewis rats divided into three experimental groups: iliac crest autograft, syngeneic iliac crest allograft, and syngeneic femoral allograft bone. Eight weeks postoperatively, fusion was evaluated via microCT analysis, manual palpation, and histology. In vitro analysis of the colony-forming and osteogenic capacity of bone marrow cells derived from rat femurs and hips was also performed to determine whether there was a correlation with the fusion efficacy of these graft sources. Although no differences were observed between groups in CT fusion mass volumes, iliac allografts displayed an increased number of radiographically fused fusion masses and a higher rate of bilateral fusion via manual palpation. Histologically, hip-derived grafts showed better integration with host bone than femur derived ones, likely associated with the higher concentration of osteogenic progenitor cells observed in hip-derived bone marrow. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using syngeneic allograft bone in place of autograft bone within inbred rat fusion models and highlights the need for further study of femoral-derived grafts in fusion.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Despite widespread use of femoral-sourced allografts in clinical spinal fusion procedures and the increasing interest in using femoral reamer-irrigator-aspirator (RIA) autograft in clinical bone grafting, few studies have examined the efficacy of femoral grafts compared to iliac crest grafts in spinal fusion. The objective of this study was to directly compare the use of autologous iliac crest with syngeneic femoral and iliac allograft bone in the rat model of lumbar spinal fusion.
METHODS
METHODS
Single-level bilateral posterolateral intertransverse process lumbar spinal fusion surgery was performed on Lewis rats divided into three experimental groups: iliac crest autograft, syngeneic iliac crest allograft, and syngeneic femoral allograft bone. Eight weeks postoperatively, fusion was evaluated via microCT analysis, manual palpation, and histology. In vitro analysis of the colony-forming and osteogenic capacity of bone marrow cells derived from rat femurs and hips was also performed to determine whether there was a correlation with the fusion efficacy of these graft sources.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Although no differences were observed between groups in CT fusion mass volumes, iliac allografts displayed an increased number of radiographically fused fusion masses and a higher rate of bilateral fusion via manual palpation. Histologically, hip-derived grafts showed better integration with host bone than femur derived ones, likely associated with the higher concentration of osteogenic progenitor cells observed in hip-derived bone marrow.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates the feasibility of using syngeneic allograft bone in place of autograft bone within inbred rat fusion models and highlights the need for further study of femoral-derived grafts in fusion.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32933551
doi: 10.1186/s13018-020-01936-8
pii: 10.1186/s13018-020-01936-8
pmc: PMC7490887
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
410Références
Cell Tissue Bank. 2002;3(3):169-73
pubmed: 15256878
J Invest Surg. 2016 Dec;29(6):373-382
pubmed: 27064603
Eur Cell Mater. 2013 Dec 13;26:252-62
pubmed: 24338347
Bone. 2011 Sep;49(3):447-54
pubmed: 21658484
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Sep 1;42(17):E995-E1001
pubmed: 28098745
Orthop Surg. 2016 Aug;8(3):270-7
pubmed: 27627708
J Orthop Trauma. 2014 Oct;28(10):584-90
pubmed: 24625833
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Oct 2;101(19):1741-1749
pubmed: 31577679
Spine J. 2004 May-Jun;4(3):281-6
pubmed: 15125850
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992 Nov;(284):80-90
pubmed: 1395317
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Jul 17;95(14):1312-6
pubmed: 23864180
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Jul 1;39(15):E902-6
pubmed: 24827513
Int Orthop. 2014 Jun;38(6):1199-203
pubmed: 24770726
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Aug 1;27(15):1599-603
pubmed: 12163718
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Nov 15;36(24):2045-50
pubmed: 21304437
J Immunol Methods. 2009 Aug 15;347(1-2):70-8
pubmed: 19567251
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2009 Oct;46(4):397-402
pubmed: 19893733
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 May;105(3):529-533
pubmed: 30885818
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Apr 15;33(8):863-9
pubmed: 18404105
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Mar 1;39(5):347-55
pubmed: 24365898
Cell Transplant. 2012;21(10):2189-200
pubmed: 22472645
Injury. 2018 Aug;49(8):1504-1512
pubmed: 29941285
Cell Tissue Res. 2009 Jun;336(3):501-7
pubmed: 19357871
Spine J. 2013 Jan;13(1):22-31
pubmed: 23295034
Eur Spine J. 2019 Apr;28(4):710-718
pubmed: 30511246
Global Spine J. 2016 Sep;6(6):592-606
pubmed: 27556001
Bone Joint J. 2013 Sep;95-B(9):1269-74
pubmed: 23997144
Biomaterials. 2010 Jan;31(2):242-9
pubmed: 19796807
Injury. 2010 Nov;41 Suppl 2:S62-8
pubmed: 21144931
J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Jul;25(1):133-7
pubmed: 26967986
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Feb 20;95(4):338-47
pubmed: 23426768
BMC Biotechnol. 2016 Dec 12;16(1):89
pubmed: 27955656
J Spinal Disord. 2000 Apr;13(2):144-9
pubmed: 10780690
Neurosurgery. 2008 Mar;62(3 Suppl 1):E179; discussion E179
pubmed: 18424957
Spine J. 2016 Jan 1;16(1):72-81
pubmed: 26343247
Eur Spine J. 2001 Feb;10(1):64-8
pubmed: 11276838
Bone. 2012 Feb;50(2):510-7
pubmed: 21807134
Int Orthop. 2008 Oct;32(5):643-8
pubmed: 17639386
Int J Mol Med. 2016 Apr;37(4):976-88
pubmed: 26935410
J Orthop Res. 2017 Sep;35(9):1868-1875
pubmed: 27935105
Spine J. 2005 Nov-Dec;5(6 Suppl):209S-216S
pubmed: 16291115
Orthop Clin North Am. 2019 Jul;50(3):297-304
pubmed: 31084831
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013 Jun;99(4):413-8
pubmed: 23597870
Ann Biomed Eng. 2016 Nov;44(11):3186-3201
pubmed: 27473706
ANZ J Surg. 2018 Dec;88(12):1247-1252
pubmed: 29763982
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 May 20;34(12):1251-6
pubmed: 19412139
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2001 Dec;9(2):1-5
pubmed: 12118123
Spine J. 2017 Jun;17(6):855-862
pubmed: 28126356
Stem Cells Int. 2017;2017:1836960
pubmed: 28539939
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012 Apr;98(2):227-32
pubmed: 22402294
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Dec 7;93(23):2227-36
pubmed: 22159859
J Orthop Res. 2015 Sep;33(9):1297-304
pubmed: 26011820
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007 Jul;20(5):374-9
pubmed: 17607103
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2014 Oct;3(10):1231-41
pubmed: 25154782