Craniofacial and Long Bone Development in the Context of Distraction Osteogenesis.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 01 2021
01 01 2021
Historique:
entrez:
28
12
2020
pubmed:
29
12
2020
medline:
28
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bone retains regenerative potential into adulthood, and surgeons harness this plasticity during distraction osteogenesis. The underlying biology governing bone development, repair, and regeneration is divergent between the craniofacial and appendicular skeleton. Each type of bone formation is characterized by unique molecular signaling and cellular behavior. Recent discoveries have elucidated the cellular and genetic processes underlying skeletal development and regeneration, providing an opportunity to couple biological and clinical knowledge to improve patient care. A comprehensive literature review of basic and clinical literature regarding craniofacial and long bone development, regeneration, and distraction osteogenesis was performed. The current understanding in craniofacial and long bone development and regeneration is discussed, and clinical considerations for the respective distraction osteogenesis procedures are presented. Distraction osteogenesis is a powerful tool to regenerate bone and thus address a number of craniofacial and appendicular skeletal deficiencies. The molecular mechanisms underlying bone regeneration, however, remain elusive. Recent work has determined that embryologic morphogen gradients constitute important signals during regeneration. In addition, striking discoveries have illuminated the cellular processes underlying mandibular regeneration during distraction osteogenesis, showing that skeletal stem cells reactivate embryologic neural crest transcriptomic processes to carry out bone formation during regeneration. Furthermore, innovative adjuvant therapies to complement distraction osteogenesis use biological processes active in embryogenesis and regeneration. Additional research is needed to further characterize the underlying cellular mechanisms responsible for improved bone formation through adjuvant therapies and the role skeletal stem cells play during regeneration.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Bone retains regenerative potential into adulthood, and surgeons harness this plasticity during distraction osteogenesis. The underlying biology governing bone development, repair, and regeneration is divergent between the craniofacial and appendicular skeleton. Each type of bone formation is characterized by unique molecular signaling and cellular behavior. Recent discoveries have elucidated the cellular and genetic processes underlying skeletal development and regeneration, providing an opportunity to couple biological and clinical knowledge to improve patient care.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature review of basic and clinical literature regarding craniofacial and long bone development, regeneration, and distraction osteogenesis was performed.
RESULTS
The current understanding in craniofacial and long bone development and regeneration is discussed, and clinical considerations for the respective distraction osteogenesis procedures are presented.
CONCLUSIONS
Distraction osteogenesis is a powerful tool to regenerate bone and thus address a number of craniofacial and appendicular skeletal deficiencies. The molecular mechanisms underlying bone regeneration, however, remain elusive. Recent work has determined that embryologic morphogen gradients constitute important signals during regeneration. In addition, striking discoveries have illuminated the cellular processes underlying mandibular regeneration during distraction osteogenesis, showing that skeletal stem cells reactivate embryologic neural crest transcriptomic processes to carry out bone formation during regeneration. Furthermore, innovative adjuvant therapies to complement distraction osteogenesis use biological processes active in embryogenesis and regeneration. Additional research is needed to further characterize the underlying cellular mechanisms responsible for improved bone formation through adjuvant therapies and the role skeletal stem cells play during regeneration.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33370054
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000007451
pii: 00006534-202101000-00020
pmc: PMC7773036
mid: NIHMS1622385
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
54e-65eSubventions
Organisme : NIDCR NIH HHS
ID : R01 DE027323
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDCR NIH HHS
ID : R01 DE027346
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Références
Orioli IM, Castilla EE, Barbosa-Neto JG. The birth prevalence rates for the skeletal dysplasias. J Med Genet. 1986;23:328–332.
Krakow D. Skeletal dysplasias. Clin Perinatol. 2015;42:301–319, viii.
Cauley JA. Public health impact of osteoporosis. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2013;68:1243–1251.
Kanis JA, Oden A, Johansson H, Borgström F, Ström O, McCloskey E. FRAX and its applications to clinical practice. Bone. 2009;44:734–743.
Unnanuntana A, Gladnick BP, Donnelly E, Lane JM. The assessment of fracture risk. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:743–753.
Ray NF, Chan JK, Thamer M, Melton LJ III. Medical expenditures for the treatment of osteoporotic fractures in the United States in 1995: Report from the National Osteoporosis Foundation. J Bone Miner Res. 1997;12:24–35.
Karsenty G. The complexities of skeletal biology. Nature. 2003;423:316–318.
Chan CK, Seo EY, Chen JY, et al. Identification and specification of the mouse skeletal stem cell. Cell. 2015;160:285–298.
Chan CKF, Gulati GS, Sinha R, et al. Identification of the human skeletal stem cell. Cell. 2018;175:43–56.e21.
Ransom RC, Carter AC, Salhotra A, et al. Mechanoresponsive stem cells acquire neural crest fate in jaw regeneration. Nature. 2018;563:514–521.
Runyan CM, Gabrick KS. Biology of bone formation, fracture healing, and distraction osteogenesis. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28:1380–1389.
Huang X, Saint-Jeannet JP. Induction of the neural crest and the opportunities of life on the edge. Dev Biol. 2004;275:1–11.
Lamouille S, Xu J, Derynck R. Molecular mechanisms of epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2014;15:178–196.
Theveneau E, Mayor R. Neural crest delamination and migration: From epithelium-to-mesenchyme transition to collective cell migration. Dev Biol. 2012;366:34–54.
Bolós V, Peinado H, Pérez-Moreno MA, Fraga MF, Esteller M, Cano A. The transcription factor Slug represses E-cadherin expression and induces epithelial to mesenchymal transitions: A comparison with Snail and E47 repressors. J Cell Sci. 2003;116:499–511.
Saitou M, Furuse M, Sasaki H, et al. Complex phenotype of mice lacking occludin, a component of tight junction strands. Mol Biol Cell. 2000;11:4131–4142.
Hulpiau P, van Roy F. Molecular evolution of the cadherin superfamily. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2009;41:349–369.
Nistico P, Bissell MJ, Radisky DC. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition: General principles and pathological relevance with special emphasis on the role of matrix metalloproteinases. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2012;4:a011908.
Sauka-Spengler T, Bronner-Fraser M. A gene regulatory network orchestrates neural crest formation. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2008;9:557–568.
Köntges G, Lumsden A. Rhombencephalic neural crest segmentation is preserved throughout craniofacial ontogeny. Development. 1996;122:3229–3242.
Kulesa PM, Fraser SE. In ovo time-lapse analysis of chick hindbrain neural crest cell migration shows cell interactions during migration to the branchial arches. Development. 2000;127:1161–1172.
Smith A, Robinson V, Patel K, Wilkinson DG. The EphA4 and EphB1 receptor tyrosine kinases and ephrin-B2 ligand regulate targeted migration of branchial neural crest cells. Curr Biol. 1997;7:561–570.
Nelson DL, Cox MM. Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry. 2008.5th edNew York: Freeman.
Alfandari D, Cousin H, Gaultier A, Hoffstrom BG, DeSimone DW. Integrin alpha5beta1 supports the migration of Xenopus cranial neural crest on fibronectin. Dev Biol. 2003;260:449–464.
McLennan R, Kulesa PM. In vivo analysis reveals a critical role for neuropilin-1 in cranial neural crest cell migration in chick. Dev Biol. 2007;301:227–239.
Clark EA, Brugge JS. Integrins and signal transduction pathways: The road taken. Science. 1995;268:233–239.
Minoux M, Holwerda S, Vitobello A, et al. Gene bivalency at polycomb domains regulates cranial neural crest positional identity. Science. 2017;355eaal2913.
Couly G, Grapin-Botton A, Coltey P, Ruhin B, Le Douarin NM. Determination of the identity of the derivatives of the cephalic neural crest: Incompatibility between Hox gene expression and lower jaw development. Development. 1998;125:3445–3459.
Gendron-Maguire M, Mallo M, Zhang M, Gridley T. Hoxa-2 mutant mice exhibit homeotic transformation of skeletal elements derived from cranial neural crest. Cell. 1993;75:1317–1331.
Holland PW, Booth HA, Bruford EA. Classification and nomenclature of all human homeobox genes. BMC Biol. 2007;5:47.
Rijli FM, Mark M, Lakkaraju S, Dierich A, Dollé P, Chambon P. A homeotic transformation is generated in the rostral branchial region of the head by disruption of Hoxa-2, which acts as a selector gene. Cell. 1993;75:1333–1349.
Gavalas A, Studer M, Lumsden A, Rijli FM, Krumlauf R, Chambon P. Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 synergize in patterning the hindbrain, cranial nerves and second pharyngeal arch. Development. 1998;125:1123–1136.
Kanzler B, Kuschert SJ, Liu YH, Mallo M. Hoxa-2 restricts the chondrogenic domain and inhibits bone formation during development of the branchial area. Development. 1998;125:2587–2597.
Dobreva G, Chahrour M, Dautzenberg M, et al. SATB2 is a multifunctional determinant of craniofacial patterning and osteoblast differentiation. Cell. 2006;125:971–986.
Grammatopoulos GA, Bell E, Toole L, Lumsden A, Tucker AS. Homeotic transformation of branchial arch identity after Hoxa2 overexpression. Development. 2000;127:5355–5365.
Pasqualetti M, Ori M, Nardi I, Rijli FM. Ectopic Hoxa2 induction after neural crest migration results in homeosis of jaw elements in Xenopus . Development. 2000;127:5367–5378.
Betts JG, Desaix P, Johnson E, et al. Bone formation and development. In: Anatomy and Physiology. 2017.Houston: OpenStax.
Stricker S, Mundlos S. FGF and ROR2 receptor tyrosine kinase signaling in human skeletal development. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2011;97:179–206.
Pizette S, Abate-Shen C, Niswander L. BMP controls proximodistal outgrowth, via induction of the apical ectodermal ridge, and dorsoventral patterning in the vertebrate limb. Development. 2001;128:4463–4474.
Tickle C, Wolpert L. The progress zone: Alive or dead? Nat Cell Biol. 2002;4:E216–E217.
Tickle C. How the embryo makes a limb: Determination, polarity and identity. J Anat. 2015;227:418–430.
Riddle RD, Johnson RL, Laufer E, Tabin C. Sonic hedgehog mediates the polarizing activity of the ZPA. Cell. 1993;75:1401–1416.
Mariani FV, Ahn CP, Martin GR. Genetic evidence that FGFs have an instructive role in limb proximal-distal patterning. Nature. 2008;453:401–405.
Thaller C, Eichele G. Identification and spatial distribution of retinoids in the developing chick limb bud. Nature. 1987;327:625–628.
Cornell RA, Kimelman D. Activin-mediated mesoderm induction requires FGF. Development. 1994;120:453–462.
Büscher D, Bosse B, Heymer J, Rüther U. Evidence for genetic control of Sonic hedgehog by Gli3 in mouse limb development. Mech Dev. 1997;62:175–182.
Roberts DJ, Johnson RL, Burke AC, Nelson CE, Morgan BA, Tabin C. Sonic hedgehog is an endodermal signal inducing Bmp-4 and Hox genes during induction and regionalization of the chick hindgut. Development. 1995;121:3163–3174.
Sagai T, Masuya H, Tamura M, et al. Phylogenetic conservation of a limb-specific, cis-acting regulator of Sonic hedgehog (Shh). Mamm Genome. 2004;15:23–34.
Parr BA, McMahon AP. Dorsalizing signal Wnt-7a required for normal polarity of D-V and A-P axes of mouse limb. Nature. 1995;374:350–353.
Berendsen AD, Olsen BR. Bone development. Bone. 2015;80:14–18.
Nusspaumer G, Jaiswal S, Barbero A, et al. Ontogenic identification and analysis of mesenchymal stromal cell populations during mouse limb and long bone development. Stem Cell Reports. 2017;9:1124–1138.
Gentili C, Cancedda R. Cartilage and bone extracellular matrix. Curr Pharm Des. 2009;15:1334–1348.
Heinegård D. Fell-Muir lecture: Proteoglycans and more. From molecules to biology. Int J Exp Pathol. 2009;90:575–586.
Aszódi A, Bateman JF, Gustafsson E, Boot-Handford R, Fässler R. Mammalian skeletogenesis and extracellular matrix: What can we learn from knockout mice? Cell Struct Funct. 2000;25:73–84.
Egawa S, Miura S, Yokoyama H, Endo T, Tamura K. Growth and differentiation of a long bone in limb development, repair and regeneration. Dev Growth Differ. 2014;56:410–424.
Mariani FV, Martin GR. Deciphering skeletal patterning: Clues from the limb. Nature. 2003;423:319–325.
Grabowski P. Physiology of bone. Endocr Dev. 2015;28:33–55.
Karsenty G, Wagner EF. Reaching a genetic and molecular understanding of skeletal development. Dev Cell. 2002;2:389–406.
Kronenberg HM. The role of the perichondrium in fetal bone development. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1116:59–64.
Caplan AI. Bone development and repair. Bioessays. 1987;6:171–175.
Pazzaglia UE, Congiu T, Sibilia V, Pagani F, Benetti A, Zarattini G. Relationship between the chondrocyte maturation cycle and the endochondral ossification in the diaphyseal and epiphyseal ossification centers. J Morphol. 2016;277:1187–1198.
Shapiro IM, Adams CS, Freeman T, Srinivas V. Fate of the hypertrophic chondrocyte: Microenvironmental perspectives on apoptosis and survival in the epiphyseal growth plate. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2005;75:330–339.
White A, Wallis G. Endochondral ossification: A delicate balance between growth and mineralisation. Curr Biol. 2001;11:R589–R591.
Vu TH, Shipley JM, Bergers G, et al. MMP-9/gelatinase B is a key regulator of growth plate angiogenesis and apoptosis of hypertrophic chondrocytes. Cell. 1998;93:411–422.
Marie PJ. Transcription factors controlling osteoblastogenesis. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2008;473:98–105.
Karelina TV, Goldberg GI, Eisen AZ. Matrix metalloproteinases in blood vessel development in human fetal skin and in cutaneous tumors. J Invest Dermatol. 1995;105:411–417.
Mackie EJ, Ahmed YA, Tatarczuch L, Chen KS, Mirams M. Endochondral ossification: How cartilage is converted into bone in the developing skeleton. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2008;40:46–62.
Marecic O, Tevlin R, McArdle A, et al. Identification and characterization of an injury-induced skeletal progenitor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:9920–9925.
Bell S, Terentjev EM. Focal adhesion kinase: The reversible molecular mechanosensor. Biophys J. 2017;112:2439–2450.
Garza RM, Alyono JC, Dorfman DW, Wan DC. Mandibular distraction in a patient with type II collagenopathy. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28:2073–2075.
Ow AT, Cheung LK. Meta-analysis of mandibular distraction osteogenesis: Clinical applications and functional outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:54e–69e.
McCarthy JG, Grayson B, Williams JK, Turk A. Distraction of the Mandible. 2017.New York: Springer Nature.
McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, Thorne CH, Grayson BH. Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;89:1–8; discussion 9–10.
Guerrero CA, Bell WH, Contasti-Bocco GI, Rodriguez AM, Contasti RV. Intraoral Mandibular Distraction. 2017.New York: Springer Nature.
Master DL, Hanson PR, Gosain AK. Complications of mandibular distraction osteogenesis. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:1565–1570.
Donneys A, Deshpande SS, Tchanque-Fossuo CN, et al. Deferoxamine expedites consolidation during mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Bone. 2013;55:384–390.
Wang GL, Jiang BH, Rue EA, Semenza GL. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 is a basic-helix-loop-helix-PAS heterodimer regulated by cellular O2 tension. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1995;92:5510–5514.
Iyer NV, Kotch LE, Agani F, et al. Cellular and developmental control of O2 homeostasis by hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha. Genes Dev. 1998;12:149–162.
Smith TG, Robbins PA, Ratcliffe PJ. The human side of hypoxia-inducible factor. Br J Haematol. 2008;141:325–334.
Zhang Y, Strehin I, Bedelbaeva K, et al. Drug-induced regeneration in adult mice. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:290ra92.
Momeni A, Rapp S, Donneys A, Buchman SR, Wan DC. Clinical use of deferoxamine in distraction osteogenesis of irradiated bone. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27:880–882.
Rauch F, Lauzier D, Croteau S, Travers R, Glorieux FH, Hamdy R. Temporal and spatial expression of bone morphogenetic protein-2, -4, and -7 during distraction osteogenesis in rabbits. Bone. 2000;27:453–459.
Chen D, Zhao M, Mundy GR. Bone morphogenetic proteins. Growth Factors. 2004;22:233–241.
Agrawal V, Sinha M. A review on carrier systems for bone morphogenetic protein-2. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2017;105:904–925.
Hu J, Zou S, Li J, Chen Y, Wang D, Gao Z. Temporospatial expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor during mandibular distraction osteogenesis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2003;31:238–243.
Warren SM, Mehrara BJ, Steinbrech DS, et al. Rat mandibular distraction osteogenesis: Part III. Gradual distraction versus acute lengthening. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107:441–453.
Makhdom AM, Hamdy RC. The role of growth factors on acceleration of bone regeneration during distraction osteogenesis. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2013;19:442–453.
Aykan A, Ozturk S, Sahin I, et al. Biomechanical analysis of the effect of mesenchymal stem cells on mandibular distraction osteogenesis. J Craniofac Surg. 2013;24:e169–e175.
Cao J, Wang L, Du ZJ, et al. Recruitment of exogenous mesenchymal stem cells in mandibular distraction osteogenesis by the stromal cell-derived factor-1/chemokine receptor-4 pathway in rats. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:937–941.
Kan B, Tasar F, Korkusuz P, et al. Histomorphometrical and radiological comparison of low-level laser therapy effects on distraction osteogenesis: Experimental study. Lasers Med Sci. 2014;29:213–220.
El-Bialy T, Tanaka E, Aizenbud D, eds. Therapeutic Ultrasound in Dentistry: Applications for Dentofacial Repair, Regeneration, and Tissue Engineering. 2018.New York: Springer.
Hagiwara T, Bell WH. Effect of electrical stimulation on mandibular distraction osteogenesis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2000;28:12–19.
Andrade Gomes do Nascimento LE, Sant’anna EF, Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas A, Issamu Nojima L, Goncalves Filho AC, Antonio Pereira Freitas S. Laser versus ultrasound on bone density recuperation after distraction osteogenesis: A cone-beam computer tomographic analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71:921–928.
Khanna A, Nelmes RT, Gougoulias N, Maffulli N, Gray J. The effects of LIPUS on soft-tissue healing: A review of literature. Br Med Bull. 2009;89:169–182.
Chim H, Sontich JK, Kaufman BR. Free tissue transfer with distraction osteogenesis is effective for limb salvage of the infected traumatized lower extremity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:2364–2372.
de Baat P, de Baat C, Bessems JH. Distraction osteogenesis in orthopaedics (in Dutch). Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2008;115:306–313.
Papakostidis C, Bhandari M, Giannoudis PV. Distraction osteogenesis in the treatment of long bone defects of the lower limbs: Effectiveness, complications and clinical results. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B:1673–1680.
Sabharwal S, Nelson SC, Sontich JK. What’s new in limb lengthening and deformity correction. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:1375–1384.
Watson JT. Distraction osteogenesis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14(Spec XXX No.):S168–S174.
Herzenberg JE, Standard SC. Flynn JM, Sankar WN, Wiesel SW, eds. Tibial lengthening with circular external fixation. In: Operative Techniques in Pediatric Orthopaedic Surgery. 20162nd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 558–566.
Herzenberg JE, Standard SC. Flynn JM, Sankar WN, Wiesel SW, eds. Femoral lengthening with external fixation. In: Operative Techniques in Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery. 20162nd edPhiladelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 538–549.
Liantis P, Mavrogenis AF, Stavropoulos NA, et al. Risk factors for and complications of distraction osteogenesis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014;24:693–698.
Vargas Barreto B, Caton J, Merabet Z, Panisset JC, Pracros JP. Complications of Ilizarov leg lengthening: A comparative study between patients with leg length discrepancy and short stature. Int Orthop. 2007;31:587–591.
Harada Y, Nakasa T, Mahmoud EE, et al. Combination therapy with intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells and articulated joint distraction for repair of a chronic osteochondral defect in the rabbit. J Orthop Res. 2015;33:1466–1473.
Zeng JJ, Guo P, Zhou N, Xie QT, Liao FC. Treatment of large bone defects with a novel biological transport disc in non-vascular transport distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45:670–677.
Salem KH, Schmelz A. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound shortens the treatment time in tibial distraction osteogenesis. Int Orthop. 2014;38:1477–1482.
Song MH, Kim TJ, Kang SH, Song HR. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound enhances callus consolidation in distraction osteogenesis of the tibia by the technique of lengthening over the nail procedure. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20:108.