Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jan 3;55(3):741-748.
doi: 10.1007/s43465-020-00313-1. eCollection 2021 Jun.

How is Biodegradable Scaffold Effective in Gap Non-union? Insights from an Experiment

Affiliations

How is Biodegradable Scaffold Effective in Gap Non-union? Insights from an Experiment

Vivek Veeresh et al. Indian J Orthop. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the role of composite (Chitosan/Chondroitin sulphate/gelatin/nano-bioglass) scaffold in the union of critical size bone defect created in the rabbit's ulna.

Methods: The composite (Chitosan/Chondroitin sulphate/gelatin/nano-bioglass) scaffold was fabricated using the freeze-drying technique under standard laboratory conditions. The scaffold was cut into the appropriate size and transferred into the defect created (critical bone size defect 1 cm) over the right ulna in the rabbit. The scaffold was not implanted on the left side thus the left side ulna served as control. Results were assessed on serial radiological examination. Rabbits were sacrificed at 20 weeks for histopathological examination (Haematoxylin-Eosin staining and Mason's trichrome staining) and scanning electron microscope observation. Radiological scoring was done by Lane and Sandhu's scoring.

Results: Among 12 rabbits, 10 could complete the follow-up. Among those 10 rabbits, 8 among the test group showed good evidence of bone formation at the gap non-union scaffold implanted site. Histological evidence of new bone formation, collagen synthesis, scaffold resorption, minimal chondrogenesis was evident by 20 weeks in the test group. Two rabbits had poor bone formation.

Conclusion: The chitosan-chondroitin sulphate-gelatin-nano-bioglass composite scaffold is efficient in osteoconduction and osteoinduction in the gap non-union model as it is biocompatible, bioactive, and non-immunogenic as well.

Keywords: Biodegradable; Composite substitute; Gap non-union model; Nano-bioglass scaffold; Osteogenesis; Tissue engineering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interestWe hereby declare that we do not have any sort of conflict of interest with any person or authority.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Composite scaffold
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Exposure of the ulna
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Creation of critical bone defect
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Scaffolds implanted at defect site
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Serial x rays at 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks showing new bone formation at defect site in right ulna
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Serial x rays at 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks showing no bone formation at defect site in left ulna
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Gross examination of bone defect of right side at 20 weeks
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
En-block resection of right ulna containing bone defect site and adjacent bone
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
a, b Bony trabeculae lined by osteoblasts along with presence of fatty marrow elements (NB- new bone, RS- resorbing scaffold) (Haematoxylin and eosin staining, 100 X)
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
a, b Showing newly formed bone cells and connective tissue (blue colour)—Masson’s trichrome staining
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Scanning electron microscope showing scaffold porosity, cell adherence and osteogenesis

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Turnbull G, Clarke J, Picard F, et al. 3D bioactive composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Bioact Mater. 2017;3(3):278–314. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.10.001. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Campana V, Milano G, Pagano E, et al. Bone substitutes in orthopaedic surgery: from basic science to clinical practice. Journal of Materials Science. Materials in Medicine. 2014;25(10):2445–2461. doi: 10.1007/s10856-014-5240-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Faour O, Dimitriou R, Cousins CA, Giannoudis PV. The use of bone graft substitutes in large cancellous voids: any specific needs? Injury. 2011;42(Suppl 2):S87–90. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Greenwald AS, Boden SD, Goldberg VM, et al. (2001) Bone-graft substitutes: facts, fictions, and applications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 83-A(Suppl 2 Pt 2):98–103. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200100022-00007 - PubMed
    1. Cooper GM, Mooney MP, Gosain AK, Campbell PG, Losee JE, Huard J. Testing the “critical-size” in calvarial bone defects: revisiting the concept of a critical-sized defect (CSD) Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2010;125(6):1685–1692. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181cb63a3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources