不同方法保存生物衍生骨修复节段性桡骨缺损的实验研究

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON REPAIRING SEGMENTAL BONE DEFECT WITH BIO DERIVED BONE PRESERVED BY VARIOUS METHODS

目的 探讨不同方法保存的生物衍生骨修复节段性桡骨缺损的效果。 方法 冻干生物衍生骨用两种不同保存液保存 3个月 ,以保存相同时间的冻干生物衍生骨为对照。选择 6 0只新西兰大白兔 ,制作 15 mm长的双侧桡骨节段性骨缺损模型 ,实验根据植入不同方法保存的材料分为 A、 B和 C组。A组植入 1号保存液处理材料 ,B组植入2号保存液处理材料 ,A、B组再根据材料是否复合成骨细胞培养分为 A1 和 A2 、B1 和 B2 组 ,A1 和 B1 组于动物左侧桡骨缺损区植入组织工程生物衍生骨 ,A2 和 B2 组于右侧植入单纯材料。C组分为 C1 和 C2 组 ,于动物左侧桡骨缺损区植入冻干材料 ,右侧为空白对照。术后 4、8和 16周取材 ,摄 X线片、组织学观察、计算机图像分析和生物力学测定。 结果 术后 4、8和 16周各组骨缺损区均有新骨生成 ,成骨量随时间的推移而增加。经 X线片、组织学和生物力学评估 ,各组的成骨能力依次为 :A1 >A2 >C1 >B1 >B2 >C2 有统计学意义 (P<0 .0 0 1,P<0 .0 5 ) ,其中 A1 组成骨能力最强 ,术后 16周骨缺损完全修复 ,骨髓腔再通 ,生物力学性能接近正常骨。 结论 选择适宜的保存液对生物衍生骨支架材料的骨修复能力有一定的促进作用。

Objective To study the difference of repairing segmental bone defect with bio derived bone preserved by various methods. Methods Freeze dried biomaterials had been stored in two different preservation solutions for three months,while the biomaterials stored for same period were observed as control group. The experimental model of 15 mm radial segmental defect was made in 60 New Zealand white rabbits, which were divided into groups A,B and C according to transplant materials preserved by various methods. Groups A and B were deeply divided into A 1 and A 2 subgroups, B 1 and B 2 subgroups according to whether materials were cocultured with osteoblasts. Tissue engineered bone was used to repair bone defects of left limbs in A 1 and B 1 subgroups, while simple material to repair defects of right limbs in A 2 and B 2 subgroups. Group C was divided into C 1 and C 2 subgroups. Freeze dried material was used to repair bone defects of the left limbs, while defects of the right limbs as blank control group. The samples were harvested and observed by the roentgenographical, histomorphological, biomechanical and computerized graphical analysis at 4,8 and 16 weeks. Results All of the defects treated with implants exhibited new bone formation 4, 8 and 16 weeks postoperatively, increasing with time. The radiological, histomorphological and biomechanical evaluation showed that the ability of new bone formation was arranged in 6 subgroups as follows:Aa-1>a(c)A 2> C 1>B 1>B 2>C 2, the difference was significant between them (?P￡1/40a±001, P￡1/40 05)?. The ability of new bone formation was strongest and at 16 weeks the defect was bridged with the appearance of marrow cavities in A 1 subgroup, the biomechanical properties in implants approached to those of normal bone. Conclusion The choice of proper preservation solution can improve the ability of repairing bone defect. ?3/4