Direct comparison of current cell-based and cell-free approaches towards the repair of craniofacial bone defects – A preclinical study. (15th October 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Corre, P.; Merceron, C.; Longis, J.; Khonsari, R.H.; Pilet, P.; thi, T. Ngo; Battaglia, S.; Sourice, S.; Masson, M.; Sohier, J.; Espitalier, F.; Guicheux, J.; Weiss, P.
• Is Part Of: Acta biomaterialia. Volume 26(2015)
• Page Start: 306
• Page End: 317
• Publication Date: 2015-10-15
• Subjects: Bone tissue engineering -- Bone graft -- Calcium phosphate -- Mesenchymal stromal cells -- Bone marrow -- Calvaria; Biomedical materials -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.08.013
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1742-7061

Abstract

Graphical abstract: Abstract: For craniofacial bone defect repair, several alternatives to bone graft (BG) exist, including the combination of biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) biomaterials with total bone marrow (TBM) and bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), or the use of growth factors like recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 (RhBMP-2) and various scaffolds. Therefore, clinicians might be unsure as to which approach will offer their patients the most benefit. Here, we aimed to compare different clinically relevant bone tissue engineering methods in an "all-in-one" study in rat calvarial defects. TBM, and MSCs committed or not, and cultured in two- or three-dimensions were mixed with BCP and implanted in bilateral parietal bone defects in rats. RhBMP-2 and BG were used as positive controls. After 7 weeks, significant de novo bone formation was observed in rhBMP-2 and BG groups, and in a lesser amount, when BCP biomaterials were mixed with TBM or committed MSCs cultured in three-dimensions. Due to the efficacy and safety of the TBM/BCP combination approach, we recommend this one-step procedure for further clinical investigation. Statement of Significance: For craniofacial repair, total bone marrow (BM) and BM mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based regenerative medicine have shown to be promising in alternative to bone grafting (BG). Therefore, clinicians might be unsure as to which approach will offer the most benefit. Here, BM and MSCs committed or not were mixed with calcium phosphate ceramics (CaP) and implanted in bone defects in rats. RhBMP-2 and BG were used as positive controls. After 7 weeks, significant bone formation was observed in rhBMP-2 and BG groups, and when CaP were mixed with BM or committed MSCs. Since the BM-based procedure does not require bone harvest or cell culture, but provides de novo bone formation, we recommend consideration of this strategy for craniofacial applications.