Cargando…

Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model

Previous studies have suggested that treatment plans for segmental bone defects (SBDs) are affected by the bone defect sizes. If the selected treatment was not the most appropriate, it would not contribute to bone healing, but increase complications. The induced membrane technique (IM) and distracti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shen, Zhen, Lin, Haixiong, Chen, Guoqian, Zhang, Yan, Li, Zige, Li, Ding, Xie, Lei, Li, Yue, Huang, Feng, Jiang, Ziwei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31860680
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226839
_version_ 1783481761884274688
author Shen, Zhen
Lin, Haixiong
Chen, Guoqian
Zhang, Yan
Li, Zige
Li, Ding
Xie, Lei
Li, Yue
Huang, Feng
Jiang, Ziwei
author_facet Shen, Zhen
Lin, Haixiong
Chen, Guoqian
Zhang, Yan
Li, Zige
Li, Ding
Xie, Lei
Li, Yue
Huang, Feng
Jiang, Ziwei
author_sort Shen, Zhen
collection PubMed
description Previous studies have suggested that treatment plans for segmental bone defects (SBDs) are affected by the bone defect sizes. If the selected treatment was not the most appropriate, it would not contribute to bone healing, but increase complications. The induced membrane technique (IM) and distraction osteogenesis (DO) have been proved to be effective in treating SBDs. However, the differences between the two in therapeutic effects on SBDs with different sizes are still unclear. Thus, we aimed to observe the effects of IM and DO on different sizes of SBDs and to further determine what method is more appropriate for what defect size. Rat models of 4-, 6-and 8-mm mid-diaphyseal defects using IM and DO techniques were established. X-rays, micro-CT, histological and immunohistochemical examinations were performed to assess bone repair. Faster bone formation rate, shorter treatment duration, higher expressions of OPN and OCN and higher parameters of bone properties including bone mineral density (BMD), bone volume/total tissue volume (BV/TV), mineral apposition rate (MAR) and mineral surface/bone surface (MS/BS) were found in 4-mm SBDs treated with DO than in those with IM treatment. However, the results were reversed and IM outperformed DO in bone repair capacity for 8-mm SBDs, while no significant difference emerges in the case of 6-mm SBDs. This study suggests that the therapeutic effects of IM and DO may be subjected to sizes of bone defects and the best treatment size of defects is different between the two. For small-sized SBDs, DO may be more suitable and efficient than IM, but IM has advantages over DO for over-sized SBDs, while DO and IM show similar bone repair capability in moderate-sized SBDs, which would offer a new insight into how to choose DO and IM for SBDs in clinical practice and provide references for further clinical research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6924672
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69246722020-01-07 Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model Shen, Zhen Lin, Haixiong Chen, Guoqian Zhang, Yan Li, Zige Li, Ding Xie, Lei Li, Yue Huang, Feng Jiang, Ziwei PLoS One Research Article Previous studies have suggested that treatment plans for segmental bone defects (SBDs) are affected by the bone defect sizes. If the selected treatment was not the most appropriate, it would not contribute to bone healing, but increase complications. The induced membrane technique (IM) and distraction osteogenesis (DO) have been proved to be effective in treating SBDs. However, the differences between the two in therapeutic effects on SBDs with different sizes are still unclear. Thus, we aimed to observe the effects of IM and DO on different sizes of SBDs and to further determine what method is more appropriate for what defect size. Rat models of 4-, 6-and 8-mm mid-diaphyseal defects using IM and DO techniques were established. X-rays, micro-CT, histological and immunohistochemical examinations were performed to assess bone repair. Faster bone formation rate, shorter treatment duration, higher expressions of OPN and OCN and higher parameters of bone properties including bone mineral density (BMD), bone volume/total tissue volume (BV/TV), mineral apposition rate (MAR) and mineral surface/bone surface (MS/BS) were found in 4-mm SBDs treated with DO than in those with IM treatment. However, the results were reversed and IM outperformed DO in bone repair capacity for 8-mm SBDs, while no significant difference emerges in the case of 6-mm SBDs. This study suggests that the therapeutic effects of IM and DO may be subjected to sizes of bone defects and the best treatment size of defects is different between the two. For small-sized SBDs, DO may be more suitable and efficient than IM, but IM has advantages over DO for over-sized SBDs, while DO and IM show similar bone repair capability in moderate-sized SBDs, which would offer a new insight into how to choose DO and IM for SBDs in clinical practice and provide references for further clinical research. Public Library of Science 2019-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6924672/ /pubmed/31860680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226839 Text en © 2019 Shen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Shen, Zhen
Lin, Haixiong
Chen, Guoqian
Zhang, Yan
Li, Zige
Li, Ding
Xie, Lei
Li, Yue
Huang, Feng
Jiang, Ziwei
Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title_full Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title_fullStr Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title_short Comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: An experimental study in a rat model
title_sort comparison between the induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis in treating segmental bone defects: an experimental study in a rat model
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31860680
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226839
work_keys_str_mv AT shenzhen comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT linhaixiong comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT chenguoqian comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT zhangyan comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT lizige comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT liding comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT xielei comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT liyue comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT huangfeng comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel
AT jiangziwei comparisonbetweentheinducedmembranetechniqueanddistractionosteogenesisintreatingsegmentalbonedefectsanexperimentalstudyinaratmodel