0
Scientific Articles   |    
Mesenchymal Stem Cell Concentration and Bone Repair: Potential Pitfalls from Bench to Bedside
Anna V. Cuomo, MD1; Mandeep Virk, MBBS2; Frank Petrigliano, MD1; Elise F. Morgan, PhD3; Jay R. Lieberman, MD2
1 David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, 16-155 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095
2 New England Musculoskeletal Institute, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut Health Center, 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06030. E-mail address for J.R. Lieberman: JLieberman@uchc.edu
3 Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Boston University, 110 Cummington Street, Boston, MA 02215
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2009; 91:1073-1083  doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00303
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Mesenchymal stem cells are multipotent and have the ability to differentiate into bone. We conducted a preclinical trial comparing the osteogenic potential of human bone marrow aspirate with that of mesenchymal stem cell-enriched bone marrow aspirate (both mixed with demineralized bone matrix) in a critical-sized rat femoral defect model.

Methods: The buffy coat was extracted from human bone marrow aspirate to obtain mesenchymal stem cell-enriched bone marrow aspirate. Fifty-nine athymic rats, each with a 6-mm femoral defect, were divided into six treatment groups: defect only (Group I), demineralized bone matrix and saline solution (Group II), demineralized bone matrix and bone marrow aspirate (Group III), demineralized bone matrix and mesenchymal stem cell-enriched bone marrow aspirate (Group IV), demineralized bone matrix and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) (Group V [positive control]), and absorbable collagen sponge and rhBMP-2 (Group VI [positive control]). All animals were killed at twelve weeks for radiographic, micro-computed tomography, histomorphometric, and histologic analysis.

Results: There was wide variability in the mesenchymal stem cell concentrations obtained from the human donors. All ten defects healed in the positive control groups (Groups V and VI). Only one defect healed in each experimental group (Groups II, III, and IV) (i.e., three of forty-four defects healed). There was no significant difference among the radiographic scores of Groups II, III, and IV (p = 0.59), and the score for each of those groups was significantly higher than that for Group I (p = 0.005) and significantly lower than those for Groups V and VI (p = 0.001). The bone volume and mineral density did not differ among Groups III, IV, and V (p = 0.53). The percent total bone volume and percent normal bone volume in Group VI were significantly higher than those values in Groups I, III, and IV (p < 0.0001) and those in Group II (p = 0.048). In Groups II through V, the cortical bone was more dense than the lace-like bone in Group VI.

Conclusions: Neither bone marrow aspirate nor mesenchymal stem cell-enriched bone marrow aspirate mixed with demineralized bone matrix resulted in reliable healing of critical-sized bone defects. It is possible that a greater number of mesenchymal stem cells or an enhanced osteoinductive signal is required for adequate bone-healing. Mesenchymal stem cell and/or carrier variability may also contribute to differences in bone formation.

Clinical Relevance: This study identified potential problems when adapting the use of mesenchymal stem cells for consistent bone repair in a clinical setting.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center