4.3 Article

MMP-9 and CD68+ cells are required for tissue remodeling in response to natural hydroxyapatite

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR HISTOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue 4, Pages 301-309

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10735-009-9241-2

Keywords

Biomaterials; Xenografts; Hydroxyapatite; MMP-9; CD68 antigen

Categories

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo [08/53003-9]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Large bone defects represent major clinical problems in the practice of reconstructive orthopedic and craniofacial surgery. The aim of this study was to examine, through immunohistochemistry approach, the involvement of MMP-9 and CD68(+) cells during tissue remodeling in response to natural hydroxyapatite (HA) implanted in rat subcutaneous tissue. Before experimentation, forty animals were randomly distributed into two experimental groups: Group-I (Gen-Ox (TM) micro-granules) and Group-II (Gen-Ox (TM) macro-granules). Afterwards, the biopsies were collected after 10, 20, 30, and 60 days post-implantation. Our results showed that at 10 days, a low-renewal foreign body type granuloma formation was observed in most of the cases. Macrophage- and fibroblast-like cells were the predominant type of cells positively stained for MMP-9 in both groups. Once macrophage-like cells seemed to be the major source of MMP9, antibody against pan-CD68 epitope was used to correlate these findings. In agreement, MMP-9 and CD68(+) cells were distributed at the periphery and the central region of the granuloma in all experimental periods, however no staining was observed in cell contacting to material. Besides macrophages, the lysosomal glycoprotein epitope recognized by CD68 antibodies can be expressed by mast cell granules and sometimes by fibroblasts. Taken together, our results suggest that xenogenic HA promotes extracellular matrix remodeling through induction of MMP-9 activity and presence of CD68(+) cells.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available