The decisive early phase of bone regeneration.
Journal
Nature reviews. Rheumatology
ISSN: 1759-4804
Titre abrégé: Nat Rev Rheumatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101500080
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2023
02 2023
Historique:
accepted:
05
12
2022
pubmed:
10
1
2023
medline:
1
2
2023
entrez:
9
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bone has a remarkable endogenous regenerative capacity that enables scarless healing and restoration of its prior mechanical function, even under challenging conditions such as advanced age and metabolic or immunological degenerative diseases. However - despite much progress - a high number of bone injuries still heal with unsatisfactory outcomes. The mechanisms leading to impaired healing are heterogeneous, and involve exuberant and non-resolving immune reactions or overstrained mechanical conditions that affect the delicate regulation of the early initiation of scar-free healing. Every healing process begins phylogenetically with an inflammatory reaction, but its spatial and temporal intensity must be tightly controlled. Dysregulation of this inflammatory cascade directly affects the subsequent healing phases and hinders the healing progression. This Review discusses the complex processes underlying bone regeneration, focusing on the early healing phase and its highly dynamic environment, where vibrant changes in cellular and tissue composition alter the mechanical environment and thus affect the signalling pathways that orchestrate the healing process. Essential to scar-free healing is the interplay of various dynamic cascades that control timely resolution of local inflammation and tissue self-organization, while also providing sufficient local stability to initiate endogenous restoration. Various immunotherapy and mechanobiology-based therapy options are under investigation for promoting bone regeneration.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36624263
doi: 10.1038/s41584-022-00887-0
pii: 10.1038/s41584-022-00887-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
78-95Informations de copyright
© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
United States Bone and Joint Initiative. The Burden of Musculoskeletal Diseases in the United States, 3rd edn (United States Bone and Joint Initiative, 2014).
Storm, A. Gesundheitsreport 2018. Analyse der Arbeitsunfähigkeitsdaten, Band 21 (DAK-Gesundheit, 2018).
Brennan, S. L. et al. Rheumatoid arthritis and incident fracture in women: a case–control study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 15, 13 (2014).
doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-13
Claes, L., Recknagel, S. & Ignatius, A. Fracture healing under healthy and inflammatory conditions. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 8, 133–143 (2012).
doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2012.1
GBD 2019 Fracture Collaborators Global, regional, and national burden of bone fractures in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 Lancet Healthy Longev. 2 e580–e592 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00172-0
Borgstrom, F. et al. Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities. Arch. Osteoporos. 15, 59 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-0706-y
Tompkins, B. A. et al. IMPACT: preclinical studies of cell therapy for human disease. Circ. Res. 122, 1006–1020 (2018).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.312486
Grigorian-Shamagian, L. et al. Insights into therapeutic products, preclinical research models, and clinical trials in cardiac regenerative and reparative medicine: where are we now and the way ahead. Current opinion paper of the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Regenerative and Reparative Medicine. Cardiovasc. Res. 117, 1428–1433 (2021).
doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvaa337
Shigeto, J. et al. Preclinical toxicity studies for regenerative medicine in Japan. Clin. Ther. 40, 1813–1822 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2018.09.007
Greenhill, C. Metabolism: role of bone in glucose metabolism. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 14, 191 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2018.25
Langdahl, B., Ferrari, S. & Dempster, D. W. Bone modeling and remodeling: potential as therapeutic targets for the treatment of osteoporosis. Ther. Adv. Musculoskelet. Dis. 8, 225–235 (2016).
doi: 10.1177/1759720X16670154
Rolvien, T. & Amling, M. Disuse osteoporosis: clinical and mechanistic insights. Calcif. Tissue Int. 110, 592–604 (2022).
doi: 10.1007/s00223-021-00836-1
Dello Russo, C. et al. Physiological adaptations affecting drug pharmacokinetics in space: what do we really know? A critical review of the literature. Br. J. Pharmacol. 179, 2538–2557 (2022).
doi: 10.1111/bph.15822
Lombardi, G., Ziemann, E. & Banfi, G. Physical activity and bone health: what is the role of immune system? A narrative review of the third way. Front. Endocrinol. 10, 60 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00060
Arron, J. R. & Choi, Y. Bone versus immune system. Nature 408, 535–536 (2000).
doi: 10.1038/35046196
Knecht, R. S. et al. Mechanobiological principles influence the immune response in regeneration: implications for bone healing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 614508 (2021).
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.614508
Shen, B. et al. A mechanosensitive peri-arteriolar niche for osteogenesis and lymphopoiesis. Nature 591, 438–444 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03298-5
Bucher, C. H., Lei, H., Duda, G. N., Volk, H.-D. & Schmidt-Bleek, K. The role of immune reactivity in bone regeneration Adv. Tech. Bone Regen. 18 3697–3707 (2016).
Bucher, C. H. et al. Experience in the adaptive immunity impacts bone homeostasis, remodeling, and healing. Front. Immunol. 10, 797 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00797
Schmidt-Bleek, K., Kwee, B. J., Mooney, D. J. & Duda, G. N. Boon and bane of inflammation in bone tissue regeneration and its link with angiogenesis. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 21, 354–364 (2015).
doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2014.0677
Schell, H. et al. The haematoma and its role in bone healing. J. Exp. Orthop. 4, 5 (2017).
doi: 10.1186/s40634-017-0079-3
Gaber, T., Dziurla, R., Tripmacher, R., Burmester, G. R. & Buttgereit, F. Hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) in rheumatology: low O2! See what HIF can do! Ann. Rheum. Dis. 64, 971–980 (2005).
doi: 10.1136/ard.2004.031641
Lang, A. et al. MIF does only marginally enhance the pro-regenerative capacities of DFO in a mouse-osteotomy-model of compromised bone healing conditions. Bone 154, 116247 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2021.116247
Loeffler, J., Duda, G. N., Sass, F. A. & Dienelt, A. The metabolic microenvironment steers bone tissue regeneration. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 29, 99–110 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2017.11.008
Street, J. et al. Is human fracture hematoma inherently angiogenic? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200009000-00033 (2000).
doi: 10.1097/00003086-200009000-00033
Berkmann, J. C. et al. Early pH changes in musculoskeletal tissues upon injury – aerobic catabolic pathway activity linked to inter-individual differences in local pH. Int. J. Mol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21072513 (2020).
doi: 10.3390/ijms21072513
Gerstenfeld, L. C., Cullinane, D. M., Barnes, G. L., Graves, D. T. & Einhorn, T. A. Fracture healing as a post-natal developmental process: molecular, spatial, and temporal aspects of its regulation. J. Cell. Biochem. 88, 873–884 (2003).
doi: 10.1002/jcb.10435
Bogeska, R. et al. Inflammatory exposure drives long-lived impairment of hematopoietic stem cell self-renewal activity and accelerated aging. Cell Stem Cell 29, 1273–1284 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2022.06.012
Schlundt, C. et al. Clinical and research approaches to treat non-union fracture. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 16, 155–168 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-018-0432-1
Steward, S. K. Fracture non-union: a review of clinical challenges and future research needs. Malays. Orthop. J. 13, 1–10 (2019).
doi: 10.5704/MOJ.1907.001
Sass, F. A. et al. Immunology guides skeletal muscle regeneration. Int. J. Mol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19030835 (2018).
doi: 10.3390/ijms19030835
Schmidt-Bleek, K. et al. Cellular composition of the initial fracture hematoma compared to a muscle hematoma: a study in sheep. J. Orthop. Res. 27, 1147–1151 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/jor.20901
Jeyaraman, M. et al. Osteogenic and chondrogenic potential of periosteum-derived mesenchymal stromal cells: do they hold the key to the future? Pharmaceuticals 14, 1133 (2021).
doi: 10.3390/ph14111133
Matsushita, Y. et al. A Wnt-mediated transformation of the bone marrow stromal cell identity orchestrates skeletal regeneration. Nat. Commun. 11, 332 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-14029-w
Julien, A. et al. Direct contribution of skeletal muscle mesenchymal progenitors to bone repair. Nat. Commun. 12, 2860 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22842-5
Ambrosi, T. H. et al. Aged skeletal stem cells generate an inflammatory degenerative niche. Nature 597, 256–262 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03795-7
Colnot, C. Skeletal cell fate decisions within periosteum and bone marrow during bone regeneration. J. Bone Miner. Res. 24, 274–282 (2009).
doi: 10.1359/jbmr.081003
Moore, S. R. et al. Translating periosteum’s regenerative power: insights from quantitative analysis of tissue genesis with a periosteum substitute implant. Stem Cell Transl. Med. 5, 1739–1749 (2016).
doi: 10.5966/sctm.2016-0004
Debnath, S. et al. Discovery of a periosteal stem cell mediating intramembranous bone formation. Nature 562, 133–139 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0554-8
van Gastel, N. et al. Lipid availability determines fate of skeletal progenitor cells via SOX9. Nature 579, 111–117 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2050-1
Tsukasaki, M. et al. Periosteal stem cells control growth plate stem cells during postnatal skeletal growth. Nat. Commun. 13, 4166 (2022).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-31592-x
Sass, F. A. et al. CD31
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.3062
Schmidt-Bleek, K. et al. Initial immune reaction and angiogenesis in bone healing. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 8, 120–130 (2012).
doi: 10.1002/term.1505
Maruyama, M. et al. Modulation of the inflammatory response and bone healing. Front. Endocrinol. 11, 386 (2020).
doi: 10.3389/fendo.2020.00386
Weitzmann, M. N. Bone and the immune system. Toxicol. Pathol. 45, 911–924 (2017).
doi: 10.1177/0192623317735316
Guder, C., Gravius, S., Burger, C., Wirtz, D. C. & Schildberg, F. A. Osteoimmunology: a current update of the interplay between bone and the immune system. Front. Immunol. 11, 58 (2020).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00058
Ono, T. & Takayanagi, H. Osteoimmunology in bone fracture healing. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 15, 367–375 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-017-0381-0
Muire, P. J., Mangum, L. H. & Wenke, J. C. Time course of immune response and immunomodulation during normal and delayed healing of musculoskeletal wounds. Front. Immunol. 11, 1056 (2020).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01056
Yang, N. & Liu, Y. The role of the immune microenvironment in bone regeneration. Int. J. Med. Sci. 18, 3697–3707 (2021).
doi: 10.7150/ijms.61080
Tsukasaki, M. & Takayanagi, H. Osteoimmunology: evolving concepts in bone-immune interactions in health and disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 19, 626–642 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41577-019-0178-8
Takayanagi, H. Osteoimmunology: shared mechanisms and crosstalk between the immune and bone systems. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 7, 292–304 (2007).
doi: 10.1038/nri2062
Walsh, M. C., Takegahara, N., Kim, H. & Choi, Y. Updating osteoimmunology: regulation of bone cells by innate and adaptive immunity. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 14, 146–156 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2017.213
Weitzmann, M. N. & Ofotokun, I. Physiological and pathophysiological bone turnover – role of the immune system. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 12, 518–532 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2016.91
Alexander, K. A. et al. Osteal macrophages promote in vivo intramembranous bone healing in a mouse tibial injury model. J. Bone Miner. Res. 26, 1517–1532 (2011).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.354
Ono, T. et al. IL-17-producing γδ T cells enhance bone regeneration. Nat. Commun. 7, 10928 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/ncomms10928
Ehnert, S. et al. Effects of immune cells on mesenchymal stem cells during fracture healing. World J. Stem Cell 13, 1667–1695 (2021).
doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v13.i11.1667
Woloszyk, A. et al. Fracture hematoma micro-architecture influences transcriptional profile and plays a crucial role in determining bone healing outcomes. Biomater. Adv. 139, 213027 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.bioadv.2022.213027
Bastian, O. W., Koenderman, L., Alblas, J., Leenen, L. P. & Blokhuis, T. J. Neutrophils contribute to fracture healing by synthesizing fibronectin
doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2016.02.001
Gaber, T. et al. Adaptation of human CD4
doi: 10.3899/jrheum.090255
Reinke, S. et al. Terminally differentiated CD8
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004754
Schlundt, C. et al. The multifaceted roles of macrophages in bone regeneration: a story of polarization, activation and time. Acta Biomater. 133, 46–57 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2021.04.052
Bahney, C. S. et al. Cellular biology of fracture healing. J. Orthop. Res. 37, 35–50 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/jor.24170
Mountziaris, P. M., Spicer, P. P., Kasper, F. K. & Mikos, A. G. Harnessing and modulating inflammation in strategies for bone regeneration. Tissue Eng. Part B, Rev. 17, 393–402 (2011).
doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2011.0182
Mountziaris, P. M. & Mikos, A. G. Modulation of the inflammatory response for enhanced bone tissue regeneration. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 14, 179–186 (2008).
doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2008.0038
Aizawa, T., Kon, T., Einhorn, T. A. & Gerstenfeld, L. C. Induction of apoptosis in chondrocytes by tumor necrosis factor-α. J. Orthop. Res. 19, 785–796 (2001).
doi: 10.1016/S0736-0266(00)00078-4
Gerstenfeld, L. C. et al. Impaired fracture healing in the absence of TNF-α signaling: the role of TNF-α in endochondral cartilage resorption. J. Bone Miner. Res. 18, 1584–1592 (2003).
doi: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.9.1584
Gerstenfeld, L. C. et al. Impaired intramembranous bone formation during bone repair in the absence of tumor necrosis factor-α signaling. Cell Tissues Organs 169, 285–294 (2001).
doi: 10.1159/000047893
Hashimoto, J. et al. Inhibitory effects of tumor necrosis factor alpha on fracture healing in rats. Bone 10, 453–457 (1989).
doi: 10.1016/8756-3282(89)90078-1
Kumar, B. V., Connors, T. J. & Farber, D. L. Human T cell development, localization, and function throughout life. Immunity 48, 202–213 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2018.01.007
Epari, D. R., Lienau, J., Schell, H., Witt, F. & Duda, G. N. Pressure, oxygen tension and temperature in the periosteal callus during bone healing – an in vivo study in sheep. Bone 43, 734–739 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2008.06.007
Stefanowski, J. et al. Limbostomy: longitudinal intravital microendoscopy in murine osteotomies. Cytometry A 97, 483–495 (2020).
doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.23997
Neve, A., Cantatore, F. P., Maruotti, N., Corrado, A. & Ribatti, D. Extracellular matrix modulates angiogenesis in physiological and pathological conditions. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 756078 (2014).
doi: 10.1155/2014/756078
Newman, A. C., Nakatsu, M. N., Chou, W., Gershon, P. D. & Hughes, C. C. The requirement for fibroblasts in angiogenesis: fibroblast-derived matrix proteins are essential for endothelial cell lumen formation. Mol. Biol. Cell 22, 3791–3800 (2011).
doi: 10.1091/mbc.e11-05-0393
Shiu, Y. T. et al. The role of mechanical stresses in angiogenesis. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 33, 431–510 (2005).
doi: 10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.v33.i5.10
Grosso, A. et al. It takes two to tango: coupling of angiogenesis and osteogenesis for bone regeneration. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 5, 68 (2017).
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2017.00068
Chandurkar, M. K. & Han, S. J. Subcellular force quantification of endothelial cells using silicone pillar arrays. Methods Mol. Biol. 2375, 229–245 (2022).
doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1708-3_19
Korff, T. & Augustin, H. G. Tensional forces in fibrillar extracellular matrices control directional capillary sprouting. J. Cell Sci. 112, 3249–3258 (1999).
doi: 10.1242/jcs.112.19.3249
Ceccarelli, J., Cheng, A. & Putnam, A. J. Mechanical strain controls endothelial patterning during angiogenic sprouting. Cell Mol. Bioeng. 5, 463–473 (2012).
doi: 10.1007/s12195-012-0242-y
Ouyang, M. et al. Sensing traction force on the matrix induces cell–cell distant mechanical communications for self-assembly. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 6, 5833–5848 (2020).
doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.0c01035
Checa, S., Rausch, M. K., Petersen, A., Kuhl, E. & Duda, G. N. The emergence of extracellular matrix mechanics and cell traction forces as important regulators of cellular self-organization. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 14, 1–13 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s10237-014-0581-9
Huebsch, N. et al. Matrix elasticity of void-forming hydrogels controls transplanted-stem-cell-mediated bone formation. Nat. Mater. 14, 1269–1277 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/nmat4407
Chaudhuri, O. et al. Hydrogels with tunable stress relaxation regulate stem cell fate and activity. Nat. Mater. 15, 326–334 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/nmat4489
Borgiani, E. et al. Age-related changes in the mechanical regulation of bone healing are explained by altered cellular mechanoresponse. J. Bone Miner. Res. 34, 1923–1937 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.3801
Perier-Metz, C., Duda, G. N. & Checa, S. Initial mechanical conditions within an optimized bone scaffold do not ensure bone regeneration – an in silico analysis. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 20, 1723–1731 (2021).
doi: 10.1007/s10237-021-01472-2
Claes, L. E. & Meyers, N. The direction of tissue strain affects the neovascularization in the fracture-healing zone. Med. Hypotheses 137, 109537 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2019.109537
Lienau, J. et al. Initial vascularization and tissue differentiation are influenced by fixation stability. J. Orthop. Res. 23, 639–645 (2005).
doi: 10.1016/j.orthres.2004.09.006
Cardwell, R. D. et al. Static and cyclic mechanical loading of mesenchymal stem cells on elastomeric, electrospun polyurethane meshes. J. Biomech. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030404 (2015).
doi: 10.1115/1.4030404
Wang, Q., Huang, H., Wei, K. & Zhao, Y. Time-dependent combinatory effects of active mechanical loading and passive topographical cues on cell orientation. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 113, 2191–2201 (2016).
doi: 10.1002/bit.25981
Schreivogel, S., Kuchibhotla, V., Knaus, P., Duda, G. N. & Petersen, A. Load-induced osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells is caused by mechano-regulated autocrine signaling. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 13, 1992–2008 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/term.2948
Kreja, L. et al. Effects of mechanical strain on human mesenchymal stem cells and ligament fibroblasts in a textured poly(L-lactide) scaffold for ligament tissue engineering. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 23, 2575–2582 (2012).
doi: 10.1007/s10856-012-4710-7
Petersen, A., Joly, P., Bergmann, C., Korus, G. & Duda, G. N. The impact of substrate stiffness and mechanical loading on fibroblast-induced scaffold remodeling. Tissue Eng. Part A 18, 1804–1817 (2012).
doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2011.0514
Kurpinski, K., Chu, J., Wang, D. & Li, S. Proteomic profiling of mesenchymal stem cell responses to mechanical strain and TGF-β1. Cell Mol. Bioeng. 2, 606–614 (2009).
doi: 10.1007/s12195-009-0090-6
Kopf, J., Petersen, A., Duda, G. N. & Knaus, P. BMP2 and mechanical loading cooperatively regulate immediate early signalling events in the BMP pathway. BMC Biol. 10, 37 (2012).
doi: 10.1186/1741-7007-10-37
K. S Kang et al. Flexure-based device for cyclic strain-mediated osteogenic differentiation J. Biomech. Eng. 135 114501 (2013).
doi: 10.1115/1.4025103
Delaine-Smith, R. M. & Reilly, G. C. The effects of mechanical loading on mesenchymal stem cell differentiation and matrix production. Vitam. Horm. 87, 417–480 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-386015-6.00039-1
Legant, W. R., Chen, C. S. & Vogel, V. Force-induced fibronectin assembly and matrix remodeling in a 3D microtissue model of tissue morphogenesis. Integr. Biol. 4, 1164–1174 (2012).
doi: 10.1039/c2ib20059g
Brauer, E. et al. Collagen fibrils mechanically contribute to tissue contraction in an in vitro wound healing scenario. Adv. Sci. 6, 1801780 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/advs.201801780
Huang, J. et al. Dermal extracellular matrix molecules in skin development, homeostasis, wound regeneration and diseases. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 128, 137–144 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2022.02.027
Nikoloudaki, G., Snider, P., Simmons, O., Conway, S. J. & Hamilton, D. W. Periostin and matrix stiffness combine to regulate myofibroblast differentiation and fibronectin synthesis during palatal healing. Matrix Biol. 94, 31–56 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.matbio.2020.07.002
Pountos, I., Georgouli, T., Pneumaticos, S. & Giannoudis, P. V. Fracture non-union: can biomarkers predict outcome? Injury 44, 1725–1732 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.09.009
Ryaby, J. T. Clinical effects of electromagnetic and electric fields on fracture healing. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199810001-00021 (1998).
doi: 10.1097/00003086-199810001-00021
Mills, L. A., Aitken, S. A. & Simpson, A. The risk of non-union per fracture: current myths and revised figures from a population of over 4 million adults. Acta Orthop. 88, 434–439 (2017).
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1321351
Leow, J. M., Clement, N. D. & Simpson, A. Application of the radiographic union scale for tibial fractures (RUST): assessment of healing rate and time of tibial fractures managed with intramedullary nailing. Orthop. Traumatol. Surg. Res. 106, 89–93 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.10.010
Alt, V. et al. A health economic analysis of the use of rhBMP-2 in Gustilo-Anderson grade III open tibial fractures for the UK, Germany, and France. Injury 40, 1269–1275 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.02.007
Kanakaris, N. K. et al. Application of bone morphogenetic proteins to femoral non-unions: a 4-year multicentre experience. Injury 40, S54–S61 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(09)70013-0
Kanakaris, N. K. et al. Application of BMP-7 to tibial non-unions: a 3-year multicenter experience. Injury 39, S83–S90 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(08)70019-6
Gelalis, I. D. et al. Diagnostic and treatment modalities in nonunions of the femoral shaft: a review. Injury 43, 980–988 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.030
Corrales, L. A., Morshed, S., Bhandari, M. & Miclau, T. 3rd Variability in the assessment of fracture-healing in orthopaedic trauma studies. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 90, 1862–1868 (2008).
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01580
Simpson, A. The forgotten phase of fracture healing: the need to predict nonunion. Bone Jt. Res. 6, 610–611 (2017).
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.610.BJR-2017-0301
Nicholson, J. A., Yapp, L. Z., Keating, J. F. & Simpson, A. Monitoring of fracture healing. Update on current and future imaging modalities to predict union. Injury 52, S29–S34 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.08.016
Zura, R. et al. Epidemiology of fracture nonunion in 18 human bones. JAMA Surg. 151, e162775 (2016).
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2775
Schneider, E. et al. Loads acting in an intramedullary nail during fracture healing in the human femur. J. Biomech. 34, 849–857 (2001).
doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00037-9
Claes, L. E. & Cunningham, J. L. Monitoring the mechanical properties of healing bone. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 467, 1964–1971 (2009).
doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0752-7
Calori, G. M. et al. Non-unions. Clin. Cases Min. Bone Metab. 14, 186–188 (2017).
doi: 10.11138/ccmbm/2017.14.1.186
Wittauer, M. et al. Definition of long-bone nonunion: a scoping review of prospective clinical trials to evaluate current practice. Injury 52, 3200–3205 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.09.008
Whelan, D. B. et al. Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J. Trauma. 68, 629–632 (2010).
Chiavaras, M. M. et al. The Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH): the use of a checklist to evaluate hip fracture healing improves agreement between radiologists and orthopedic surgeons. Skelet. Radiol. 42, 1079–1088 (2013).
doi: 10.1007/s00256-013-1605-8
Frank, T. et al. The Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH) identifies radiographic nonunion of femoral neck fractures. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 474, 1396–1404 (2016).
doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4680-4
Bhandari, M. et al. Radiographic Union Score for Hip substantially improves agreement between surgeons and radiologists. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 14, 70 (2013).
doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-70
Leow, J. M., Clement, N. D., Tawonsawatruk, T., Simpson, C. J. & Simpson, A. H. The radiographic union scale in tibial (RUST) fractures: reliability of the outcome measure at an independent centre. Bone Jt. Res. 5, 116–121 (2016).
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000628
Sun, G. et al. Regulatory B cell is critical in bone union process through suppressing proinflammatory cytokines and stimulating Foxp3 in Treg cells. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 44, 455–462 (2017).
doi: 10.1111/1440-1681.12719
Chitwood, J. R. et al. Predicting fracture healing with blood biomarkers: the potential to assess patient risk of fracture nonunion. Biomarkers 26, 703–717 (2021).
doi: 10.1080/1354750X.2021.1985171
Working, Z. M. et al. A quantitative serum biomarker of circulating collagen X effectively correlates with endochondral fracture healing. J. Orthop. Res. 39, 53–62 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/jor.24776
Jiang, H. et al. Downregulation of regulatory T cell function in patients with delayed fracture healing. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 45, 430–436 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/1440-1681.12902
Schlundt, C. et al. Individual effector/regulator T cell ratios impact bone regeneration. Front. Immunol. 10, 1954 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01954
Konnecke, I. et al. T and B cells participate in bone repair by infiltrating the fracture callus in a two-wave fashion. Bone 64, 155–165 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.03.052
Horwitz, E. M. Advancing regenerative medicine the translational way. Sci. Transl. Med. 5, 177fs179 (2013).
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3005873
Helfet, D. L. et al. AO philosophy and principles of fracture management – its evolution and evaluation. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 85, 1156–1160 (2003).
doi: 10.2106/00004623-200306000-00029
Duda, G. N., Haas, N. P. & Bergmann, G. Founding of the Julius Wolff Institut Charite – Universitatsmedizin Berlin: editorial comment. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 468, 1050–1051 (2010).
doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1238-3
Palomares, K. T. et al. Mechanical stimulation alters tissue differentiation and molecular expression during bone healing. J. Orthop. Res. 27, 1123–1132 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/jor.20863
Duda, G. N. et al. Does partial weight bearing unload a healing bone in external ring fixation. Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 388, 298–304 (2003).
doi: 10.1007/s00423-003-0386-2
Vetter, A. et al. Temporal tissue patterns in bone healing of sheep. J. Orthop. Res. 28, 1440–1447 (2010).
doi: 10.1002/jor.21175
Braun, B. J. et al. Weight-bearing recommendations after operative fracture treatment – fact or fiction? Gait results with and feasibility of a dynamic, continuous pedobarography insole. Int. Orthop. 41, 1507–1512 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3481-7
Claes, L., Eckert-Hubner, K. & Augat, P. The fracture gap size influences the local vascularization and tissue differentiation in callus healing. Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 388, 316–322 (2003).
doi: 10.1007/s00423-003-0396-0
Elliott, D. S. et al. A unified theory of bone healing and nonunion: BHN theory. Bone Jt. J. 98-B, 884–891 (2016).
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B7.36061
Schell, H. et al. The course of bone healing is influenced by the initial shear fixation stability. J. Orthop. Res. 23, 1022–1028 (2005).
doi: 10.1016/j.orthres.2005.03.005
Epari, D. R., Schell, H., Bail, H. J. & Duda, G. N. Instability prolongs the chondral phase during bone healing in sheep. Bone 38, 864–870 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2005.10.023
Epari, D. R., Taylor, W. R., Heller, M. O. & Duda, G. N. Mechanical conditions in the initial phase of bone healing. Clin. Biomech. 21, 646–655 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2006.01.003
Kaspar, K. et al. Angle stable locking reduces interfragmentary movements and promotes healing after unreamed nailing. Study of a displaced osteotomy model in sheep tibiae. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 87, 2028–2037 (2005).
doi: 10.2106/00004623-200509000-00017
Heyland, M. et al. Semi-rigid screws provide an auxiliary option to plate working length to control interfragmentary movement in locking plate fixation at the distal femur. Injury 46, S24–S32 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(15)30015-2
Mardian, S., Schaser, K. D., Duda, G. N. & Heyland, M. Working length of locking plates determines interfragmentary movement in distal femur fractures under physiological loading. Clin. Biomech. 30, 391–396 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.02.006
Mardian, S. et al. What constitutes a good osteosynthesis? [German]. Chirurg 92, 863–872 (2021).
Dreyer, M. J. et al. European Society of Biomechanics S.M. Perren Award 2022: standardized tibio-femoral implant loads and kinematics. J. Biomech. 141, 111171 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111171
Virzì, A. et al. Comprehensive review of 3D segmentation software tools for MRI usable for pelvic surgery planning. J. Digit. Imaging 33, 99–110 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s10278-019-00239-7
Reichert, J. C. et al. A tissue engineering solution for segmental defect regeneration in load-bearing long bones. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 141ra193 (2012).
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3003720
Cipitria, A. et al. Porous scaffold architecture guides tissue formation. J. Bone Miner. Res. 27, 1275–1288 (2012).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1589
Strong, A. L., Neumeister, M. W. & Levi, B. Stem cells and tissue engineering: regeneration of the skin and its contents. Clin. Plast. Surg. 44, 635–650 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2017.02.020
Srivastava, A. K. & Bulte, J. W. Seeing stem cells at work in vivo. Stem Cell Rev. Rep. 10, 127–144 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s12015-013-9468-x
Chikate, T. R. & Tang, L. Tracking and imaging of transplanted stem cells in animals. Methods Mol. Biol. 2150, 45–56 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/7651_2019_275
Challen, G. A., Boles, N., Lin, K. K. & Goodell, M. A. Mouse hematopoietic stem cell identification and analysis. Cytometry A 75, 14–24 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.20674
Bhat, S., Viswanathan, P., Chandanala, S., Prasanna, S. J. & Seetharam, R. N. Expansion and characterization of bone marrow derived human mesenchymal stromal cells in serum-free conditions. Sci. Rep. 11, 3403 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-83088-1
Wang, Y., Yi, H. & Song, Y. The safety of MSC therapy over the past 15 years: a meta-analysis. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 12, 545 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s13287-021-02609-x
Thum, T., Bauersachs, J., Poole-Wilson, P. A., Volk, H. D. & Anker, S. D. The dying stem cell hypothesis: immune modulation as a novel mechanism for progenitor cell therapy in cardiac muscle. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 46, 1799–1802 (2005).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.07.053
Jiang, W. & Xu, J. Immune modulation by mesenchymal stem cells. Cell Prolif. 53, e12712 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/cpr.12712
Cai, Y. et al. Stroke treatment: is exosome therapy superior to stem cell therapy. Biochimie 179, 190–204 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2020.09.025
Denu, R. A. et al. Fibroblasts and mesenchymal stromal/stem cells are phenotypically indistinguishable. Acta Haematol. 136, 85–97 (2016).
doi: 10.1159/000445096
Hematti, P. Mesenchymal stromal cells and fibroblasts: a case of mistaken identity. Cytotherapy 14, 516–521 (2012).
doi: 10.3109/14653249.2012.677822
Haniffa, M. A., Collin, M. P., Buckley, C. D. & Dazzi, F. Mesenchymal stem cells: the fibroblasts’ new clothes. Haematologica 94, 258–263 (2009).
doi: 10.3324/haematol.13699
Bautista-Hernandez, L. A., Gomez-Olivares, J. L., Buentello-Volante, B. & Bautista-de Lucio, V. M. Fibroblasts: the unknown sentinels eliciting immune responses against microorganisms. Eur. J. Microbiol. Immunol. 7, 151–157 (2017).
doi: 10.1556/1886.2017.00009
Geissler, S. et al. In serum veritas–in serum sanitas? Cell non-autonomous aging compromises differentiation and survival of mesenchymal stromal cells via the oxidative stress pathway. Cell Death Dis. 4, e970 (2013).
doi: 10.1038/cddis.2013.501
Wendler, S. et al. Immune modulation to enhance bone healing – a new concept to induce bone using prostacyclin to locally modulate immunity. Front. Immunol. 10, 713 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00713
Schlundt, C. et al. Macrophages in bone fracture healing: their essential role in endochondral ossification. Bone 106, 78–89 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2015.10.019
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04543682 (2022).
Wan, C. et al. Activation of the hypoxia-inducible factor-1α pathway accelerates bone regeneration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 686–691 (2008).
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0708474105
Komatsu, D. E., Bosch-Marce, M., Semenza, G. L. & Hadjiargyrou, M. Enhanced bone regeneration associated with decreased apoptosis in mice with partial HIF-1α deficiency. J. Bone Miner. Res. 22, 366–374 (2007).
doi: 10.1359/jbmr.061207
Wang, Y. et al. The hypoxia-inducible factor α pathway couples angiogenesis to osteogenesis during skeletal development. J. Clin. Invest. 117, 1616–1626 (2007).
doi: 10.1172/JCI31581
Schmidt, A. H. Autologous bone graft: is it still the gold standard? Injury 52, S18–S22 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.01.043
Yang, M. et al. Ophiopogonin D promotes bone regeneration by stimulating CD31(hi) EMCN(hi) vessel formation. Cell Prolif. 53, e12784 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/cpr.12784
Kim, S. W., Kim, H. & Yoon, Y. S. Advances in bone marrow-derived cell therapy: CD31-expressing cells as next generation cardiovascular cell therapy. Regen. Med. 6, 335–349 (2011).
doi: 10.2217/rme.11.24
Ernst, M. Smart implants in fracture care – only buzzword or real opportunity? Injury 52, S101–S105 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.09.026
Tanzer, M., Laverdière, C., Barimani, B. & Hart, A. Augmented reality in arthroplasty: an overview of clinical applications, benefits, and limitations. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 15, e760–e768 (2022).
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-00964
Petersen, A. et al. A biomaterial with a channel-like pore architecture induces endochondral healing of bone defects. Nat. Commun. 9, 4430 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-06504-7
Paris, M. et al. Scaffold curvature-mediated novel biomineralization process originates a continuous soft tissue-to-bone interface. Acta Biomater. 60, 64–80 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.07.029
Pobloth, A. M. et al. Mechanobiologically optimized 3D titanium-mesh scaffolds enhance bone regeneration in critical segmental defects in sheep. Sci. Transl. Med. 10, eaam8828 (2018).
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aam8828
Koh, A., Guerado, E. & Giannoudis, P. V. Atypical femoral fractures related to bisphosphonate treatment: issues and controversies related to their surgical management. Bone Jt. J. 99-B, 295–302 (2017).
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B3.BJJ-2016-0276.R2
Andrzejowski, P. & Giannoudis, P. V. The ‘diamond concept’ for long bone non-union management. J. Orthop. Traumatol. 20, 21 (2019).
doi: 10.1186/s10195-019-0528-0
Kroner, J. et al. Mast cells are critical regulators of bone fracture-induced inflammation and osteoclast formation and activity. J. Bone Miner. Res. 32, 2431–2444 (2017).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.3234
Kovtun, A. et al. The crucial role of neutrophil granulocytes in bone fracture healing. Eur. Cell Mater. 32, 152–162 (2016).
doi: 10.22203/eCM.v032a10
Schwarz, C. S. et al. Spatio-temporal bone remodeling after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22, 267 (2020).
doi: 10.3390/ijms22010267
Ambrosi, T. H. et al. Adipocyte accumulation in the bone marrow during obesity and aging impairs stem cell-based hematopoietic and bone regeneration. Cell Stem Cell https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2017.02.009 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2017.02.009