Characterization of the inflammatory response to four commercial bone graft substitutes using a murine biocompatibility model

Figures & data

Figure 1 The histological appearance of air pouch membranes from mice implanted with saline (A), ProOsteon^® (B), DBX^® (C), Accell Connexus^® (D), and Accell DBM-100™ (E). Original magnification = 50× (A, B, D) or 100× (C, E) for larger photographs (Bars = 500 microns), 200× for smaller insets (Bars = 100 microns).

Figure 2 Membrane thickness of control and bone graft substitute-stimulated air pouches.

Notes: ^aP < 0.05 versus saline control. n = 6 mice/group.
Abbreviation: SE, standard error

Figure 3 Membrane cellularity within the cavity of the pouch of control and bone graft substitute-stimulated mice.

Notes: ^aP < 0.05 versus saline control. n = 6 mice/group.
Abbreviation: SE, standard error

Figure 4 Ratio of macrophages/monocytes to fibroblasts within the air pouch of control and bone graft substitutes.

Notes: ^aP < 0.05 versus saline control. n = 6 mice/group.
Abbreviation: SE, standard error

Figure 5 Interleukin-1 gene copies produced using reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction with mRNA extracted from the air pouches of control and bone graft substitute-stimulated mice.

Notes: ^aP < 0.05 versus saline control. n = 6 mice/group.
Abbreviations: SE, standard error; mRNA, messenger ribonucleic acid.

Table 1 Summary of data from histological analyses and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction analysis

Bone graft substitute	Membrane thickness (mean ± SE, μm)	Pouch density (mean ± SE, cells/mm^2)	Macrophages/monocytes: fibroblasts	Interleukin-1 expression (mean ± SE, copies)
Saline	47.7 ± 2.4	1.0 ± 0.2	1:4	50,609 ± 24,083
ProOsteon^®	166.7 ± 7.2	30.7 ± 1.2	1:3.3	113,930 ± 23,715
DBX^®	202.3 ± 8.7	63.1 ± 1.0	1:4	167,203 ± 50,079
Accell Connexus^®	124.8 ± 6.5	96.0 ± 1.6	1:1.3	146,115 ± 44,487
Acell DBM-100™	134.4 ± 6.3	107.7 ± 2.2	1:2.3	377,137 ± 83,669

Abbreviation: SE, standard error.