Adult mesenchymal stem cells and impaction grafting: a new clinical paradigm shift

References

• Segal HE, Bellamy TN. The joint health benefits delivery program: improving access and reducing costs – successes and pitfalls. Mil. Med.153(8), 430–431 (1988).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Birrell F, Johnell O, Silman A. Projecting the need for hip replacement over the next three decades: influence of changing demography and threshold for surgery. Ann. Rheum. Dis.58(9), 569–572 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon T, Shaw M, Ebrahim S, Dieppe P. Trends in hip and knee joint replacement: socioeconomic inequalities and projections of need. Ann. Rheum. Dis.63(7), 825–830 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozic KJ, Durbhakula S, Berry DJ et al. Differences in patient and procedure characteristics and hospital resource use in primary and revision total joint arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J. Arthroplasty20(7 Suppl. 3), 17–25 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowe JF, Sculco TP, Kahn B. Revision total hip arthroplasty: hospital cost and reimbursement analysis. Clin. Orthop. Relat Res.413, 175–182 (2003).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slooff TJ, Huiskes R, van HJ, Lemmens AJ. Bone grafting in total hip replacement for acetabular protrusion. Acta Orthop. Scand.55(6), 593–596 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS, Simon JP, Slooff TJ, Timperley AJ. Contained morselized allograft in revision total hip arthroplasty. Surgical technique. Orthop. Clin. North Am.24(4), 717–725 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday BR, English HW, Timperley AJ, Gie GA, Ling RS. Femoral impaction grafting with cement in revision total hip replacement. Evolution of the technique and results. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.85(6), 809–817 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eldridge JD, Smith EJ, Hubble MJ, Whitehouse SL, Learmonth ID. Massive early subsidence following femoral impaction grafting. J. Arthroplasty12(5), 535–540 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe P. Impaction grafting or cement alone for femoral revision hip replacement. Conference proceedings, ANZORS. Sydney, Australia (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Anderson MJ, Keyak JH, Skinner HB. Compressive mechanical properties of human cancellous bone after γ irradiation. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.74(5), 747–752 (1992).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pelker RR, Friedlaender GE, Markham TC, Panjabi MM, Moen CJ. Effects of freezing and freeze-drying on the biomechanical properties of rat bone. J. Orthop. Res.1(4), 405–411 (1984).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cornu O, Bavadekar A, Godts B, Van Tomme J, Delloye C, Banse X. Impaction bone grafting with freeze-dried irradiated bone. Part II. Changes in stiffness and compactness of morselized grafts: experiments in cadavers. Acta Orthop. Scand.74(5), 553–558 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambe WRV. Soil Mechanics – SI Version. John Wiley & Sons, London, UK (1979).
   Google Scholar
• Smith GN. Elements of Soil Mechanics (6th Edition). Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Dunlop DG, Brewster NT, Madabhushi SP, Usmani AS, Pankaj P, Howie CR. Techniques to improve the shear strength of impacted bone graft: the effect of particle size and washing of the graft. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.85-A(4), 639–646 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Friedlaender GE. Bone grafts. The basic science rationale for clinical applications. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.69(5), 786–790 (1987).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brewster NT, Gillespie WJ, Howie CR, Madabhushi SP, Usmani AS, Fairbairn DR. Mechanical considerations in impaction bone grafting. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.81(1), 118–124 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blom AW, Cunningham JL, Hughes G et al. The compatibility of ceramic bone graft substitutes as allograft extenders for use in impaction grafting of the femur. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.87(3), 421–425 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Haaren EH, Smit TH, Phipps K, Wuisman PI, Blunn G, Heyligers IC. Tricalcium-phosphate and hydroxyapatite bone-graft extender for use in impaction grafting revision surgery. An in vitro study on human femora. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.87(2), 267–271 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arts JJ, Gardeniers JW, Welten ML, Verdonschot N, Schreurs BW, Buma P. No negative effects of bone impaction grafting with bone and ceramic mixtures. Clin. Orthop. Relat Res. (438), 239–247 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kanczler JM, Barry J, Ginty P, Howdle SM, Shakesheff KM, Oreffo RO. Supercritical carbon dioxide generated vascular endothelial growth factor encapsulated poly(DL-lactic acid) scaffolds induce angiogenesis in vitro. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.352, 135–141 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tagil M, Aspenberg P. Impaction of cancellous bone grafts impairs osteoconduction in titanium chambers. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.352, 231–238 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Tagil M, Jeppsson C, Aspenberg P. Bone graft incorporation. Effects of osteogenic protein-1 and impaction. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.371, 240–245 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• McGee MA, Findlay DM, Howie DW et al. The use of OP-1 in femoral impaction grafting in a sheep model. J. Orthop. Res.22(5), 1008–1015 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeppsson C, Astrand J, Tagil M, Aspenberg P. A combination of bisphosphonate and BMP additives in impacted bone allografts. Acta Orthop. Scand.74(4), 483–489 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ling RS, Timperley AJ, Linder L. Histology of cancellous impaction grafting in the femur. A case report. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.75(5), 693–696 (1993).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mikhail WE, Weidenhielm LR, Wretenberg P, Mikhail N, Bauer TW. Femoral bone regeneration subsequent to impaction grafting during hip revision: histologic analysis of a human biopsy specimen. J. Arthroplasty14(7), 849–853 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelissen RG, Bauer TW, Weidenhielm LR, LeGolvan DP, Mikhail WE. Revision hip arthroplasty with the use of cement and impaction grafting. Histological analysis of four cases. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.77(3), 412–422 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ullmark G, Obrant KJ. Histology of impacted bone-graft incorporation. J. Arthroplasty17(2), 150–157 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stock UA, Vacanti JP. Tissue engineering: current state and prospects. Annu. Rev. Med.52, 443–451 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedenstein AJ, Petrakova KV, Kurolesova AI, Frolova GP. Heterotopic of bone marrow. Analysis of precursor cells for osteogenic and hematopoietic tissues. Transplantation6(2), 230–247 (1968).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedenstein AJ. Precursor cells of mechanocytes. Int. Rev. Cytol.47327–359 (1976).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedenstein AJ, Ivanov-Smolenski AA, Chajlakjan RK et al. Origin of bone marrow stromal mechanocytes in radiochimeras and heterotopic transplants. Exp. Hematol.6(5), 440–444 (1978).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oreffo ROC, Cooper C, Mason C, Clements M. Mesenchymal stem cells: lineage, plasticity and skeletal therapeutic potential. Stem Cell Rev.1(2), 168–177 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Owen M, Friedenstein AJ. Stromal stem cells: marrow-derived osteogenic precursors. Ciba Found. Symp.136, 42–60 (1988).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goshima J, Goldberg VM, Caplan AI. The osteogenic potential of culture-expanded rat marrow mesenchymal cells assayed in vivo in calcium phosphate ceramic blocks. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. (262), 298–311 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianco P, Robey PG. Stem cells in tissue engineering. Nature414(6859), 118–121 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernigou P, Poignard A, Beaujean F, Rouard H. Percutaneous autologous bone-marrow grafting for nonunions. Influence of the number and concentration of progenitor cells. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.87(7), 1430–1437 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernigou P, Beaujean F. Treatment of osteonecrosis with autologous bone marrow grafting. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. (405), 14–23 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bruder SP, Kraus KH, Goldberg VM, Kadiyala S. The effect of implants loaded with autologous mesenchymal stem cells on the healing of canine segmental bone defects. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.80(7), 985–996 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arinzeh TL, Peter SJ, Archambault MP et al. Allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells regenerate bone in a critical-sized canine segmental defect. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.85-A(10), 1927–1935 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dai KR, Xu XL, Tang TT et al. Repairing of goat tibial bone defects with BMP-2 gene-modified tissue-engineered bone. Calcif. Tissue Int.77(1), 55–61 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Boer FC, Wippermann BW, Blokhuis TJ, Patka P, Bakker FC, Haarman HJ. Healing of segmental bone defects with granular porous hydroxyapatite augmented with recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 or autologous bone marrow. J. Orthop. Res.21(3), 521–528 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mushipe MT, Chen X, Jennings D, Li G. Cells seeded on MBG scaffold survive impaction grafting technique: potential application of cell-seeded biomaterials for revision arthroplasty. J. Orthop. Res.24(3), 501–507 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korda M, Blunn G, Phipps K et al. Can mesenchymal stem cells survive under normal impaction force in revision total hip replacements? Tissue Eng.12(3), 625–630 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tilley S, Dunlop DG, Oreffo ROC. Synthetic scaffolds seeded with mesenchymal stem cells – the future of impaction bone grafting? J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.88-B(Suppl. III), 403 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Brewster NT, Gillespie WJ, Howie CR, Madabhushi SP, Usmani AS, Fairbairn DR. Mechanical considerations in impaction bone grafting. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.81(1), 118–124 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dunlop DG, Brewster NT, Madabhushi SP, Usmani AS, Pankaj P, Howie CR. Techniques to improve the shear strength of impacted bone graft: the effect of particle size and washing of the graft. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.85-A(4), 639–646 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Simmons PJ, Torok-Storb B. Identification of stromal cell precursors in human bone marrow by a novel monoclonal antibody, STRO-1. Blood78(1), 55–62 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart K, Walsh S, Screen J et al. Further characterization of cells expressing STRO-1 in cultures of adult human bone marrow stromal cells. J. Bone Miner. Res.14(8), 1345–1356 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gronthos S, Graves SE, Ohta S, Simmons PJ. The STRO-1+ fraction of adult human bone marrow contains the osteogenic precursors. Blood84(12), 4164–4173 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart K, Monk P, Walsh S, Jefferiss CM, Letchford J, Beresford JN. STRO-1, HOP-26 (CD63), CD49a and SB-10 (CD166) as markers of primitive human marrow stromal cells and their more differentiated progeny: a comparative investigation in vitro. Cell Tissue Res.313(3), 281–290 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacArthur BD, Oreffo RO. Bridging the gap. Nature433(7021), 19 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolland BJRF, Partridge K, Tilley S, New AMR, Dunlop DG, Oreffo ROC. Biological and mechanical enhancement of impacted allograft seeded with human bone marrow stromal cells. Regenerative Med.1(4), 457–467 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen TA, Aronow M, Shalhoub V et al. Progressive development of the rat osteoblast phenotype in vitro: reciprocal relationships in expression of genes associated with osteoblast proliferation and differentiation during formation of the bone extracellular matrix. J. Cell Physiol.143(3), 420–430 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toms AD, Barker RL, Jones RS, Kuiper JH. Impaction bone-grafting in revision joint replacement surgery. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.86-A(9), 2050–2060 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Yang XB, Whitaker MJ, Sebald W et al. Human osteoprogenitor bone formation using encapsulated bone morphogenetic protein 2 in porous polymer scaffolds. Tissue Eng.10(7–8), 1037–1045 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Korovessis P, Koureas G, Zacharatos S, Papazisis Z, Lambiris E. Correlative radiological, self-assessment and clinical analysis of evolution in instrumented dorsal and lateral fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease. Autograft versus coralline hydroxyapatite. Eur. Spine J.14(7), 630–638 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burwell RG. Studies in the transplantation of bone. VII. The fresh composite homograft-autograft of cancellous bone; an analysis of factors leading to osteogenesis in marrow transplants and in marrow containing bone grafts. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.46, 110–140 (1964).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vaccaro AR, Chiba K, Heller JG et al. Bone grafting alternatives in spinal surgery. Spine J.2(3), 206–215 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Feinberg SE, Aghaloo TL, Cunningham LL Jr. Role of tissue engineering in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction: findings of the 2005 AAOMS Research Summit. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.63(10), 1418–1425 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gangji V, Hauzeur JP, Matos C, De Maertelaer V, Toungouz M, Lambermont M. Treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head with implantation of autologous bone-marrow cells. A pilot study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.86-A(6), 1153–1160 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khanal GP, Garg M, Singh GK. A prospective randomized trial of percutaneous marrow injection in a series of closed fresh tibial fractures. Int. Orthop.28(3), 167–170 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilley S, Bolland BJRF, Partridge K et al. Taking tissue engineering principles into theater: augmentation of impacted allograft with human bone marrow stromal cells. Regenerative Med.1(5), 685–692 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar