FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Vet Surg / Influence of a novel scaffold composed of polyurethane, hydr...
Veterinary surgery : VS2021; 50(5); 1117-1127; doi: 10.1111/vsu.13608

Influence of a novel scaffold composed of polyurethane, hydroxyapatite, and decellularized bone particles on the healing of fourth metacarpal defects in mares.

Abstract: To determine the effect of a novel scaffold, designed for use in bone regeneration, on healing of splint bone segmental defects in mares. Methods: In vivo experimental study. Methods: Five adult mares (4-10 years old; mean weight, 437.7 kg ± 29 kg). Methods: Bilateral 2-cm full-thickness defects were created in the fourth metacarpal bones (MCIV) of each horse. Each defect was randomly assigned to either a novel scaffold treatment (n = 5) or an untreated control (n = 5). The scaffold was composed of polyurethane, hydroxyapatite, and decellularized bone particles. Bone healing was assessed for a period of 60 days by thermography, ultrasonography, radiography, and computed tomography (CT). Biopsies of each defect were performed 60 days after surgery for histological evaluation. Results: On the basis of radiographic analysis, scaffold-treated defects had greater filling (67.42% ± 26.7%) compared with untreated defects (35.88% ± 32.7%; P = .006). After 60 days, CT revealed that the density of the defects treated with the scaffolds (807.80 ± 129.6 Hounsfield units [HU]) was greater than density of the untreated defects (464.80 ± 81.3 HU; P = .004). Evaluation of histology slides provided evidence of bone formation within an average of 9.43% ± 3.7% of the cross-sectional area of scaffolds in contrast to unfilled defects in which connective tissue was predominant throughout the biopsy specimens. Conclusions: The novel scaffold was biocompatible and supported bone formation within the MCIV segmental defects. Conclusions: This novel scaffold offers an effective option for filling bone voids in horses when support of bone healing is indicated.
© 2021 The Authors. Veterinary Surgery published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-05-05 PubMed ID: 33948951PubMed Central: PMC8360067DOI: 10.1111/vsu.13608Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research study aimed to examine the impact of a new scaffold, designed to aid bone regeneration, on the healing of splint bone segmental defects in mares. The results indicated that the new scaffold was biocompatible and assisted in bone formation within the segmental defects.

Study Design and Methodology

  • The research was an in vivo experimental study conducted on five adult mares aged between four and ten. These mares had a mean weight of 437.7 kg.
  • The researchers created bilateral full-thickness defects, measuring 2 cm, in the mares’ fourth metacarpal bones. These defects were randomly designated to be either scaffold treatment or untreated control.
  • The novel scaffold utilised in the study was made from polyurethane, hydroxyapatite and decellularized bone particles. Bone healing was evaluated for sixty days with the aid of thermography, radiography, ultrasonography, and computed tomography (CT).
  • Biopsies of each defect were conducted sixty days after the surgery to aid histological examination.

Outcome and Results

  • Based on radiographic analysis, defects treated with the scaffold demonstrated greater filling (67.42%) in comparison with the untreated ones (35.88%).
  • Post sixty days, CT scans revealed that the defects treated with the scaffold displayed greater density than the density observed in untreated defects.
  • Histological examination of the slides showed evidence of bone formation within an average area of 9.43% of the scaffold. In contrast, untreated defects predominantly contained connective tissue throughout the biopsy samples.

Conclusions

  • The study concluded that the new scaffold was biocompatible and facilitated bone formation within the segmental defects of the metacarpal bones in mares.
  • The findings suggest that this novel scaffold may serve as an effective solution for filling bone voids in horses when there is an indicated need for bone healing support.

Cite This Article

APA
Grzeskowiak RM, Alghazali KM, Hecht S, Donnell RL, Doherty TJ, Smith CK, Anderson DE, Biris AS, Adair HS. (2021). Influence of a novel scaffold composed of polyurethane, hydroxyapatite, and decellularized bone particles on the healing of fourth metacarpal defects in mares. Vet Surg, 50(5), 1117-1127. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.13608

Publication

Veterinary surgery : VS
ISSN: 1532-950X
NlmUniqueID: 8113214
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 50
Issue: 5
Pages: 1117-1127

Researcher Affiliations

Grzeskowiak, Remigiusz M
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Alghazali, Karrer M
  • Center for Integrative Nanotechnology Sciences, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.
Hecht, Silke
  • Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Donnell, Robert L
  • Department of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Doherty, Thomas J
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Smith, Christopher K
  • Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Anderson, David E
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Biris, Alexandru S
  • Center for Integrative Nanotechnology Sciences, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.
Adair, Henry S
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Biocompatible Materials
  • Bone Regeneration
  • Bone and Bones
  • Durapatite
  • Female
  • Guided Tissue Regeneration / veterinary
  • Horse Diseases / surgery
  • Horses
  • Metacarpal Bones / diagnostic imaging
  • Metacarpal Bones / injuries
  • Metacarpal Bones / pathology
  • Polyurethanes
  • Tissue Scaffolds / veterinary
  • Wound Healing

Grant Funding

  • Karen Gilhousen Equine Bone Regeneration Fund, Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee.

Conflict of Interest Statement

D.E. Anderson and A. S. Biris A.S. have co‐ownership in the regenerative novel scaffold technology used in this research that has been licensed by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock to NuShores Biosciences LLC. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest related to this report.

References

This article includes 48 references
  1. Clegg PD. Musculoskeletal disease and injury, now and in the future. Part 1: fractures and fatalities.. Equine Vet J 2011 Nov;43(6):643-9.
    pubmed: 21933264doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00457.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  2. Smith MRW, Corletto FC, Wright IM. Parasagittal fractures of the proximal phalanx in Thoroughbred racehorses in the UK: Outcome of repaired fractures in 113 cases (2007-2011).. Equine Vet J 2017 Nov;49(6):784-788.
    pubmed: 28556936doi: 10.1111/evj.12707google scholar: lookup
  3. Samiullah MH, Varma VS, Nguhiu‐Mwangi J, Mogoa EGM. Incidence, types and outcomes of distal limb fractures of racehorses in Kenya: a retrospective study of radiographs (2005‐2014). Int J Vet Sci 2017;6:81–85.
  4. Donati B, Fürst AE, Hässig M, Jackson MA. Epidemiology of fractures: The role of kick injuries in equine fractures.. Equine Vet J 2018 Sep;50(5):580-586.
    pubmed: 29441693doi: 10.1111/evj.12819google scholar: lookup
  5. Glass K, Watts AE. Septic Arthritis, Physitis, and Osteomyelitis in Foals.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2017 Aug;33(2):299-314.
    pubmed: 28687092doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2017.03.002google scholar: lookup
  6. Curtiss AL, Stefanovski D, Richardson DW. Surgical site infection associated with equine orthopedic internal fixation: 155 cases (2008-2016).. Vet Surg 2019 Jul;48(5):685-693.
    pubmed: 30993777doi: 10.1111/vsu.13216google scholar: lookup
  7. Auer JA, Grainger DW. Fracture management in horses: Where have we been and where are we going?. Vet J 2015 Oct;206(1):5-14.
    pubmed: 26095036doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.06.002google scholar: lookup
  8. Ahern BJ, Richardson DW, Boston RC, Schaer TP. Orthopedic infections in equine long bone fractures and arthrodeses treated by internal fixation: 192 cases (1990-2006).. Vet Surg 2010 Jul;39(5):588-93.
    pubmed: 20459481doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2010.00705.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  9. Uzal FA, Diab SS. Gastritis, Enteritis, and Colitis in Horses.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2015 Aug;31(2):337-58.
    pmc: PMC7127504pubmed: 26048413doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2015.04.006google scholar: lookup
  10. Welsh CE, Duz M, Parkin TDH, Marshall JF. Disease and pharmacologic risk factors for first and subsequent episodes of equine laminitis: A cohort study of free-text electronic medical records.. Prev Vet Med 2017 Jan 1;136:11-18.
    pubmed: 28010903doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.11.012google scholar: lookup
  11. Fillingham Y, Jacobs J. Bone grafts and their substitutes.. Bone Joint J 2016 Jan;98-B(1 Suppl A):6-9.
    pubmed: 26733632doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.98b.36350google scholar: lookup
  12. Millis D, Martinez SA. Bone grafts. Textbook of Small Animal Surgery 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2003:1875.
  13. Auer JA, von Rechenberg B, Bohner M, Hofmann‐Amtenbrink M. Bone grafts and bone replacements. Equine Surgery 4th ed.St Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders; 2012:1081–1094.
  14. Younger EM, Chapman MW. Morbidity at bone graft donor sites.. J Orthop Trauma 1989;3(3):192-5.
    pubmed: 2809818doi: 10.1097/00005131-198909000-00002google scholar: lookup
  15. Albrektsson T, Johansson C. Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration.. Eur Spine J 2001 Oct;10 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S96-101.
    pmc: PMC3611551pubmed: 11716023doi: 10.1007/s005860100282google scholar: lookup
  16. Cohen JM, Southwood LL, Engiles J, Leitch M, Nunamaker DM. Effects of a novel hydrogel on equine bone healing: a pilot study.. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012;25(3):184-91.
    pubmed: 22366873doi: 10.3415/vcot-11-01-0006google scholar: lookup
  17. David F, Levingstone TJ, Schneeweiss W, de Swarte M, Jahns H, Gleeson JP, O'Brien FJ. Enhanced bone healing using collagen-hydroxyapatite scaffold implantation in the treatment of a large multiloculated mandibular aneurysmal bone cyst in a thoroughbred filly.. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2015 Oct;9(10):1193-9.
    pubmed: 25712436doi: 10.1002/term.2006google scholar: lookup
  18. Stack JD, Levingstone TJ, Lalor W, Sanders R, Kearney C, O'Brien FJ, David F. Repair of large osteochondritis dissecans lesions using a novel multilayered tissue engineered construct in an equine athlete.. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2017 Oct;11(10):2785-2795.
    pubmed: 27198896doi: 10.1002/term.2173google scholar: lookup
  19. Korthagen NM, Brommer H, Hermsen G, Plomp SGM, Melsom G, Coeleveld K, Mastbergen SC, Weinans H, van Buul W, van Weeren PR. A short-term evaluation of a thermoplastic polyurethane implant for osteochondral defect repair in an equine model.. Vet J 2019 Sep;251:105340.
    pubmed: 31492385doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2019.105340google scholar: lookup
  20. Bow A, Anderson DE, Dhar M. Commercially available bone graft substitutes: the impact of origin and processing on graft functionality.. Drug Metab Rev 2019 Nov;51(4):533-544.
    pubmed: 31577468doi: 10.1080/03602532.2019.1671860google scholar: lookup
  21. Bow A, Newby S, Rifkin R. Evaluation of a polyurethane platform for delivery of nanohydroxyapatite and decellularized bone particles in a porous three‐dimensional scaffold. ACS Appl Bio Mater 2019;2(5):1815–1829.
  22. Jackson BK, Bow AJ, Kannarpady G, Biris AS, Anderson DE, Dhar M, Bourdo SE. Polyurethane/nano-hydroxyapatite composite films as osteogenic platforms.. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 2018 Aug;29(12):1426-1443.
    pubmed: 29649935doi: 10.1080/09205063.2018.1464264google scholar: lookup
  23. Alghazali KM, Nima ZA, Hamzah RN, Dhar MS, Anderson DE, Biris AS. Bone-tissue engineering: complex tunable structural and biological responses to injury, drug delivery, and cell-based therapies.. Drug Metab Rev 2015;47(4):431-54.
    pubmed: 26651522doi: 10.3109/03602532.2015.1115871google scholar: lookup
  24. Oh SH, Park SC, Kim HK, Koh YJ, Lee JH, Lee MC, Lee JH. Degradation Behavior of 3D Porous Polydioxanone-b-Polycaprolactone Scaffolds Fabricated Using the Melt-Molding Particulate-Leaching Method.. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 2011;22(1-3):225-37.
    pubmed: 20557697doi: 10.1163/092050609x12597621891620google scholar: lookup
  25. Steflik DE, Corpe RS, Young TR, Sisk AL, Parr GR. The biologic tissue responses to uncoated and coated implanted biomaterials.. Adv Dent Res 1999 Jun;13:27-33.
    pubmed: 11276743doi: 10.1177/08959374990130011101google scholar: lookup
  26. Kim HW, Knowles JC, Kim HE. Hydroxyapatite/poly(epsilon-caprolactone) composite coatings on hydroxyapatite porous bone scaffold for drug delivery.. Biomaterials 2004 Mar-Apr;25(7-8):1279-87.
    pubmed: 14643602doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.07.003google scholar: lookup
  27. Zakaria SM, Sharif Zein SH, Othman MR, Yang F, Jansen JA. Nanophase hydroxyapatite as a biomaterial in advanced hard tissue engineering: a review.. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2013 Oct;19(5):431-41.
    pubmed: 23557483doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0624google scholar: lookup
  28. Gabriel LP, Santos ME, Jardini AL, Bastos GN, Dias CG, Webster TJ, Maciel Filho R. Bio-based polyurethane for tissue engineering applications: How hydroxyapatite nanoparticles influence the structure, thermal and biological behavior of polyurethane composites.. Nanomedicine 2017 Jan;13(1):201-208.
    pubmed: 27720929doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2016.09.008google scholar: lookup
  29. Jenson PW, Gaughan EM, Lillich JD, Bryant JE. Segmental ostectomy of the second and fourth metacarpal and metatarsal bones in horses: 17 cases (1993-2002).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004 Jan 15;224(2):271-4.
    pubmed: 14736073doi: 10.2460/javma.2004.224.271google scholar: lookup
  30. Southwood LL, Kawcak CE, McIlwraith CW, Frisbie DD. Evaluation of an equine metacarpal IV fracture defect model. Vet Surg 2006;35:E1‐E28.
  31. Ishihara A, Shields KM, Litsky AS, Mattoon JS, Weisbrode SE, Bartlett JS, Bertone AL. Osteogenic gene regulation and relative acceleration of healing by adenoviral-mediated transfer of human BMP-2 or -6 in equine osteotomy and ostectomy models.. J Orthop Res 2008 Jun;26(6):764-71.
    pubmed: 18241059doi: 10.1002/jor.20585google scholar: lookup
  32. McD￮ LA, Pack L, Lores M, Wright GM, Esparza-Gonzalez B, Masaoud E. Osteoprogenitor cell therapy in an equine fracture model.. Vet Surg 2012 Oct;41(7):773-83.
    pubmed: 22804243doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2012.01024.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  33. Ishihara A, Zekas LJ, Litsky AS, Weisbrode SE, Bertone AL. Dermal fibroblast-mediated BMP2 therapy to accelerate bone healing in an equine osteotomy model.. J Orthop Res 2010 Mar;28(3):403-11.
    pubmed: 19777486doi: 10.1002/jor.20978google scholar: lookup
  34. Perrier M, Lu Y, Nemke B, Kobayashi H, Peterson A, Markel M. Acceleration of second and fourth metatarsal fracture healing with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2/calcium phosphate cement in horses.. Vet Surg 2008 Oct;37(7):648-55.
    pubmed: 19134087doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2008.00431.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  35. Southwood LL, Kawcak CE, Hidaka C, McIlwraith CW, Werpy N, Macleay J, Frisbie DD. Evaluation of direct in vivo gene transfer in an equine metacarpal IV ostectomy model using an adenoviral vector encoding the bone morphogenetic protein-2 and protein-7 gene.. Vet Surg 2012 Apr;41(3):345-54.
    pubmed: 22308976doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2011.00947.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  36. Turner TA. Thermography as an aid to the clinical lameness evaluation.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1991 Aug;7(2):311-38.
    pubmed: 1933566doi: 10.1016/s0749-0739(17)30502-3google scholar: lookup
  37. Turner TA, Pansch J, Wilson JH. Thermographic assessment of racing Thoroughbreds. In: Proceedings of the 47th Annual Convention of the American Association of Equine Practitioners; November 24‐28, 2001; San Diego, CA.
  38. Rekant SI, Lyons MA, Pacheco JM, Arzt J, Rodriguez LL. Veterinary applications of infrared thermography.. Am J Vet Res 2016 Jan;77(1):98-107.
    pubmed: 26709943doi: 10.2460/ajvr.77.1.98google scholar: lookup
  39. Soroko M, Howell K. The infrared thermography: current applications in equine medicine. J Equine Vet Sci 2018;60:90–96.
  40. Celeste CJ, Deschesne K, Riley CB, Theoret CL. Skin temperature during cutaneous wound healing in an equine model of cutaneous fibroproliferative disorder: kinetics and anatomic-site differences.. Vet Surg 2013 Feb;42(2):147-53.
    pubmed: 22742866doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2012.00966.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  41. Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT.. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26(1):e1-7.
    pubmed: 24325572doi: 10.1111/clr.12315google scholar: lookup
  42. Vajgel A, Mardas N, Farias BC, Petrie A, Cimões R, Donos N. A systematic review on the critical size defect model.. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014 Aug;25(8):879-93.
    pubmed: 23742162doi: 10.1111/clr.12194google scholar: lookup
  43. Reichert JC, Saifzadeh S, Wullschleger ME, Epari DR, Schütz MA, Duda GN, Schell H, van Griensven M, Redl H, Hutmacher DW. The challenge of establishing preclinical models for segmental bone defect research.. Biomaterials 2009 Apr;30(12):2149-63.
    pubmed: 19211141doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.050google scholar: lookup
  44. Li Y, Chen SK, Li L, Qin L, Wang XL, Lai YX. Bone defect animal models for testing efficacy of bone substitute biomaterials.. J Orthop Translat 2015 Jul;3(3):95-104.
    pmc: PMC5982383pubmed: 30035046doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2015.05.002google scholar: lookup
  45. Armiento AR, Alini M, Stoddart MJ. Articular fibrocartilage - Why does hyaline cartilage fail to repair?. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2019 Jun;146:289-305.
    pubmed: 30605736doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2018.12.015google scholar: lookup
  46. Petrochenko P, Narayan RJ. Novel approaches to bone grafting: porosity, bone morphogenetic proteins, stem cells, and the periosteum.. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2010;20(4):303-15.
    pmc: PMC3181122pubmed: 21488823doi: 10.1615/jlongtermeffmedimplants.v20.i4.50google scholar: lookup
  47. Kujala S, Ryhänen J, Danilov A, Tuukkanen J. Effect of porosity on the osteointegration and bone ingrowth of a weight-bearing nickel-titanium bone graft substitute.. Biomaterials 2003 Nov;24(25):4691-7.
    pubmed: 12951012doi: 10.1016/s0142-9612(03)00359-4google scholar: lookup
  48. Loh QL, Choong C. Three-dimensional scaffolds for tissue engineering applications: role of porosity and pore size.. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2013 Dec;19(6):485-502.
    pmc: PMC3826579pubmed: 23672709doi: 10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0437google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Schulze F, Lang A, Schoon J, Wassilew GI, Reichert J. Scaffold Guided Bone Regeneration for the Treatment of Large Segmental Defects in Long Bones. Biomedicines 2023 Jan 24;11(2).
    doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11020325pubmed: 36830862google scholar: lookup
  2. Yazdanian A, Jahandideh A, Hesaraki S. The effect of green synthesis of TiO(2) nanoparticles/collagen/HA scaffold in bone regeneration: As an animal study. Vet Med Sci 2023 Sep;9(5):2342-2351.
    doi: 10.1002/vms3.1222pubmed: 37485579google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.