4.8 Article

The induction of bone formation in rat calvarial defects and subcutaneous tissues by recombinant human BMP-2, produced in Escherichia coli

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 31, 期 13, 页码 3512-3519

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.075

关键词

BMP (bone morphogenetic protein); Bone regeneration; Bone tissue engineering; Histomorphometry; In vivo test

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2009-0073534]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2009-0073534] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the ability of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2, produced from Escherichia coli (ErhBMP-2), to form orthotopic and ectopic bone in rat models. BMP-2 was expressed in E. coli and extracted from the inclusion bodies. Critical-sized calvarial defects and subcutaneous pouches were created in rats, and an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS) was loaded with different doses of ErhBMP-2 for implantation. ACS alone and sham surgery controls were also included. Implant sites were evaluated by histological and/or histometric analyses following a 2- or 8-week healing interval. In the calvarial defect model, enhanced bone formation was observed with all doses of ErhBMP-2, while only limited amounts of new bone were found in controls. In the ectopic subcutaneous implant model, bone formation was clearly observed in all animals treated with ErhBMP-2 at 2 weeks. However, at 8 weeks, less new bone formation was detected than at 2 weeks. Nevertheless, the remaining new bone showed an advanced degree of bone remodeling and more maturity than that observed at 2 weeks. These results showed that ErhBMP-2 was osteoinductive under controlled in vivo conditions. Thus, ErhBMP-2 has definite potential as an alternative to rhBMP-2 produced in a eukaryotic system for clinical use. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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