4.5 Article

In vivo cartilage regeneration induced by a double-network hydrogel: Evaluation of a novel therapeutic strategy for femoral articular cartilage defects in a sheep model

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH PART A
卷 104, 期 9, 页码 2159-2165

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.35745

关键词

Cartilage repair; double-network hydrogel; polymer; in vivo; sheep model

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, Japan [15H03014]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15H03014] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to establish the efficacy of a therapeutic strategy for an articular cartilage defect using a poly-(2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonic acid)/poly-(N,N'-dimethyl acrylamide) DN gel in a sheep model. Seventeen mature sheep were used in this study. We created a 6.0-mm osteochondral defect in the femoral trochlea of the patellofemoral (PF) joint and the medial condyle of the tibiofemoral (TF) joint. A cylindrical DN gel plug was implanted into the defect of the right knee so that a vacant space of the planned depths of 2.0 mm in group I, 3.0 mm in group II, and 4.0 mm in group III were left. In the left knee, we created a defect with the same depth as the right knee. The regenerated tissues were evaluated with the O'Driscoll score and real-time PCR analysis of the cartilage marker genes at 12 weeks. The DN gel implanted defect of group II in the PF and TF joints was completely filled with a sufficient volume of the proteoglycan-rich tissue stained with Safranin-O. The score showed that group II was significantly greater than groups I and III when treated with DN gel in the PF joint (p=0.0441, p=0.0174, respectively) and in the TF joint (p=0.0019, p=0.0006, respectively). This study has clarified the short-term efficacy of the cartilage regeneration strategy using the DN gel in a sheep model. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 104A: 2159-2165, 2016.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据