Evaluation of the Osteoinductive Capacity of Canine Demineralized Bone Matrix in Heterotopic Muscle Sites of Athymic Rats

Summary

The osteoinductive capacity of canine demineralized bone matrix (DBM), implanted in epaxial muscle sites of athymic rats, was evaluated using calcium content and histomorphometry at two, four and six weeks after implantation. Results of this study confirm that DBM, derived from canine sources, does possess significant osteoinductive ability since histological examination revealed the presence of new cartilage, bone, or both, at 21/24 implantation sites. The osteogenesis induced by canine DBM continued as an active, cumulative process throughout the six week investigation period. The mean percentage of total induced osteogenic components including new, live cartilage, woven bone, lamellar bone and bone marrow cellular elements, was significantly greater after six weeks than after two weeks of implantation (p <0.01). Comparison of histomorphometric point counts at two, four and six weeks of implantation supported the conclusion that bone for mation as induced by canine DBM, proceeds primarily via an endochondral ossification pathway. Although the amount of calcium deposited in tissues harvested from DBM implanted sites tended to increase as implantation time lengthened, there was not a statistically significant correlation between calcium content and the level of osteogenic activity seen histologically (r = 0.32, p = 0.13).

The osteoinductive capacity of canine demineralized bone matrix (DBM), implanted in ep-axial muscle sites of athymic rats, was evaluated using calcium content and histomorphometry at two, four and six weeks after implantation. Results of this investigation confirm that DBM, derived from canine sources, does possess significant osteo-inductive ability and that bone formation proceeds primarily via a pathway of endochondral ossification.

Keywords

Canine - osteoinduction - demineralized bone matrix

• REFERENCES

• 1 Urist MR. Bone: formation by autoinduction. Science 1965; 150: 893-9.
• 2 Urist MR. Bone transplants and implants. In: Fundamental and Clinical Bone Physiology. Urist MR. (ed). Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1980: 331-68.
• 3 Reddi AH, Wientroub S, Muthukumaran N. Biologic principles of bone induction. Orthop Clin North Am 1987; 18: 207-12.
• 4 Mulliken JB, Kaban LB, Glowacki J. Induced osteogenesis: the biological principle and clinical applications. J Surg Res 1987; 37: 487-96.
• 5 Urist MR, Granstein R, Nogami H. et al. Transmembrane bone morphogenesis across multiple walled diffusion chambers. New evidence for a diffusible bone morphogenic property. Arch Surg 1977; 112: 612-9.
• 6 Reddi AH. Cell biology and biochemistry of endochondral bone development. Collagen Research 1981; 1: 209-26.
• 7 Urist MR, DeLange RJ, Finerman GAM. Bone cell differentiation and growth factors. Science 1983; 220: 680-6.
• 8 Reddi AH, Cunningham NS. Bone induction by osteogenin and bone morphogenetic proteins. Biomaterials 1990; 11: 33-4.
• 9 Sampath TK, Reddi AH. Homology of bone inductive proteins from human, monkey, bovine, and rat extracellular matrix. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1983; 80: 6591-5.
• 10 Aspcnberg P, Throngren KG, Lohmandcr LS. Rabbit bone matrix induces bone in the athymic rat. Acta Orthop Scand 1988; 59: 276-8.
• 11 Winer BJ. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1971
• 12 Conover WJ. Practical Non-parametric Statistics. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1980
• 13 Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1981
• 14 Schwarz N, Dinges HP, Schiesser A. et al. Dog bone less osteogenic than rat bone. Acta Orthop Scand 1989; 60: 693-5.
• 15 Sampath TK, Reddi AH. Importance of geometry of the extracellular matrix in endochondral bone formation. J Cell Biol 1984; 98: 2192-7.
• 16 Muthukumaran N, Ma S, Reddi AH. Dose-dependence of and threshold for optimal bone induction by collagenous bone matrix and osteogenin-enriched fraction. Collagen Rel Res 1988; 8: 433-41.
• 17 Jergesen HE, Chua J, Kao RT, Kaban LB. Age effects on bone induction by demineralized bone powder. Clin Orthop 1991; 268: 253-9.
• 18 Syftestad GT, Urist MR. Bone aging. Clin Orthop 1982; 162: 288-97.
• 19 Moore TM, Artal R, Arenas M, Gendler E. Influence of postmortem time and temperature on osteoinductive activity of demineralized microperforated ethylene oxide-sterilized syngeneic bone implant in the rat. Clin Orthop 1990; 259: 239-44.
• 20 Munting E, Wilmart JF, Wijne A. et al. Effect of sterilization on osteoinduction: comparison of five methods in demineralized rat bone. Acta Orthop Scand 1988; 59: 34-8.
• 21 Urist MR, Strakes BS. Bone morphogenetic protein. J Dent Res 1971; 50: 1392-406.
• 22 Urist MR, Strakes BS. Bone formation in implants of partially and wholly demineralized bone matrix. Clin Orthop 1970; 71: 271-8.
• 23 Landesman R, Reddi AH. In vivo analysis of the half-life of the osteoinductive potential of demineralized bone matrix using diffusion chambers. Calcif Tissue Int 1989; 45: 348-53.
• 24 Sato K, Urist MR. Induced regeneration of calvaria by bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) in dogs. Clin Orthop 1985; 197: 301-11.
• 25 Aspenberg P, Lohmander LS, Thorngren KG. Failure of bone induction by bone matrix in adult monkeys. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1988; 70: 625-7.
• 26 Heckman JD, Boyan BD, Aufdemorte TB, Abbott JT. Use of bone morphogenetic protein in the treatment of non-union in a canine model. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73A: 750-64.