Cargando…

A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies

STUDY DESIGN: Large animal research. OBJECTIVE: Lumbar discectomy is the most commonly performed spinal surgical procedure. We investigated 2 large animal models of lumbar discectomy in order to study the regenerative capacity of mesenchymal stem cells following disc injury. METHODS: Twelve adult ew...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Daly, Chris D., Ghosh, Peter, Badal, Tanya, Shimmon, Ronald, Jenkin, Graham, Oehme, David, Cooper-White, Justin, Sher, Idrees, Chandra, Ronil V., Goldschlager, Tony
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6293427/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30560038
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218779988
_version_ 1783380532529201152
author Daly, Chris D.
Ghosh, Peter
Badal, Tanya
Shimmon, Ronald
Jenkin, Graham
Oehme, David
Cooper-White, Justin
Sher, Idrees
Chandra, Ronil V.
Goldschlager, Tony
author_facet Daly, Chris D.
Ghosh, Peter
Badal, Tanya
Shimmon, Ronald
Jenkin, Graham
Oehme, David
Cooper-White, Justin
Sher, Idrees
Chandra, Ronil V.
Goldschlager, Tony
author_sort Daly, Chris D.
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Large animal research. OBJECTIVE: Lumbar discectomy is the most commonly performed spinal surgical procedure. We investigated 2 large animal models of lumbar discectomy in order to study the regenerative capacity of mesenchymal stem cells following disc injury. METHODS: Twelve adult ewes underwent baseline 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by lumbar intervertebral disc injury by either drill bit (n = 6) or annulotomy and partial nucleotomy (APN) (n = 6). Necropsies were performed 6 months later. Lumbar spines underwent 3-T and 9.4-T MRI prior to histological, morphological and biochemical analysis. RESULTS: Drill bit-injured (DBI) and APN-injured discs demonstrated increased Pfirrmann grades relative to uninjured controls (P < .005), with no difference between the 2 models. Disc height index loss was greater in the APN group compared with the DBI group (P < .005). Gross morphology injury scores were higher in APN than DBI discs (P < .05) and both were higher than controls (P < .005). Proteoglycan was reduced in the discs of both injury models relative to controls (P < .005), but lower in the APN group (P < .05). Total collagen of the APN group disc regions was higher than DBI and control discs (P < .05). Histology revealed more matrix degeneration, vascular infiltration, and granulation in the APN model. CONCLUSION: Although both models produced disc degeneration, the APN model better replicated the pathobiology of human discs postdiscectomy. We therefore concluded that the APN model was a more appropriate model for the investigation of the regenerative capacity of mesenchymal stem cells administered postdiscectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6293427
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62934272018-12-17 A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies Daly, Chris D. Ghosh, Peter Badal, Tanya Shimmon, Ronald Jenkin, Graham Oehme, David Cooper-White, Justin Sher, Idrees Chandra, Ronil V. Goldschlager, Tony Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Large animal research. OBJECTIVE: Lumbar discectomy is the most commonly performed spinal surgical procedure. We investigated 2 large animal models of lumbar discectomy in order to study the regenerative capacity of mesenchymal stem cells following disc injury. METHODS: Twelve adult ewes underwent baseline 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by lumbar intervertebral disc injury by either drill bit (n = 6) or annulotomy and partial nucleotomy (APN) (n = 6). Necropsies were performed 6 months later. Lumbar spines underwent 3-T and 9.4-T MRI prior to histological, morphological and biochemical analysis. RESULTS: Drill bit-injured (DBI) and APN-injured discs demonstrated increased Pfirrmann grades relative to uninjured controls (P < .005), with no difference between the 2 models. Disc height index loss was greater in the APN group compared with the DBI group (P < .005). Gross morphology injury scores were higher in APN than DBI discs (P < .05) and both were higher than controls (P < .005). Proteoglycan was reduced in the discs of both injury models relative to controls (P < .005), but lower in the APN group (P < .05). Total collagen of the APN group disc regions was higher than DBI and control discs (P < .05). Histology revealed more matrix degeneration, vascular infiltration, and granulation in the APN model. CONCLUSION: Although both models produced disc degeneration, the APN model better replicated the pathobiology of human discs postdiscectomy. We therefore concluded that the APN model was a more appropriate model for the investigation of the regenerative capacity of mesenchymal stem cells administered postdiscectomy. SAGE Publications 2018-06-10 2018-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6293427/ /pubmed/30560038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218779988 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Daly, Chris D.
Ghosh, Peter
Badal, Tanya
Shimmon, Ronald
Jenkin, Graham
Oehme, David
Cooper-White, Justin
Sher, Idrees
Chandra, Ronil V.
Goldschlager, Tony
A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title_full A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title_fullStr A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title_short A Comparison of Two Ovine Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Injury Models for the Evaluation and Development of Novel Regenerative Therapies
title_sort comparison of two ovine lumbar intervertebral disc injury models for the evaluation and development of novel regenerative therapies
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6293427/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30560038
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218779988
work_keys_str_mv AT dalychrisd acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT ghoshpeter acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT badaltanya acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT shimmonronald acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT jenkingraham acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT oehmedavid acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT cooperwhitejustin acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT sheridrees acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT chandraronilv acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT goldschlagertony acomparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT dalychrisd comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT ghoshpeter comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT badaltanya comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT shimmonronald comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT jenkingraham comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT oehmedavid comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT cooperwhitejustin comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT sheridrees comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT chandraronilv comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies
AT goldschlagertony comparisonoftwoovinelumbarintervertebraldiscinjurymodelsfortheevaluationanddevelopmentofnovelregenerativetherapies