4.6 Article

Glucosamine HCl reduces equine articular cartilage degradation in explant culture

Journal

OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE
Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 258-265

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1053/joca.1999.0299

Keywords

glucosamine; osteoarthritis; articular cartilage; equine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine whether glucosamine inhibits experimentally induced degradation of equine articular cartilage explants. Methods: Articular cartilage was obtained from the antebrachio-carpal and middle joints of horses (2-8 years old) killed for reasons unrelated to lameness. Cartilage discs were harvested from the weight-bearing region of the articular surface and cultured. Media were exchanged daily and the recovered media stored at 4 degrees C. Explants were maintained in basal media 2 days prior to the start of four treatment days. On days 1-4 lipopolysaccharide (LPS, 10 mu g/ml) or recombinant human interleukin-1 (rhIL-1, 50 ng/ml) were added to induce cartilage degradation. To test the potential protective effects of glucosamine, the compound was added in three concentrations (0.25, 2.5, or 25 mg/ml) and treatments were performed in triplicate. Controls included wells without LPS, rhIL-1 beta, or glucosamine. Nitric oxide, proteoglycan and matrix metalloproteinases (MMP) released into conditioned media and tissue proteoglycan synthesis were measured as indicators of cartilage metabolism. Results: Maximal nitric oxide production, proteoglycan release, and MMP activity were detected 1 day after the addition of LPS or rhIL-1 beta to the media. The addition of 25 mg/ml of glucosamine prevented the increase in nitric oxide production, proteoglycan release and MMP activity induced by LPS or rhIL-1. Conclusions: These data indicate that glucosamine can prevent experimentally induced cartilage degradation in vitro. (C) 2000 OsteoArthritis Research Society International.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available