4.6 Article

Anatomic variations of the lacunar-canalicular system influence solute transport in bone

Journal

BONE
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 704-710

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2009.06.026

Keywords

Osteocytes; Bone fluid flow; Lacunar density; Canalicular number; Transport enhancement

Funding

  1. NIH [P20RRO16458, R01AR054385]
  2. University of Delaware Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Solute transport in the lacunar-canalicular system (LCS) is essential for bone metabolism and mechanotransduction. Using the technique of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) we have been quantifying solute transport in the LCS of murine long bone as a function of loading parameters and molecular size. However, the influence of LCS anatomy, which varies among animal species, bone type and location, age and health condition, is not well understood. In this study, we developed a mathematical model to simulate solute convection in the LCS during a FRAP experiment under a physiological cyclic flow. We found that the transport rate (the reciprocal time constant for refilling the photobleached lacunar increased linearly with canalicular number and decreased with canalicular length for both diffusion and convection. As a result, the transport enhancement of convection over diffusion was much less sensitive to the variations associated with chick, mouse, rabbit, bovine, dog, horse, and human LCS anatomy, when compared with the rates of diffusion or convection alone. Canalicular density did not affect transport enhancement, while solute size and the lacunar density had more complicated, non-linear effects. This parametric study suggests that solute transport could be altered by varying LCS parameters, and that the anatomical details of the LCS need systemic examination to further understand the etiology of aged and osteoporotic bones. (c) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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