Influence of Acidic Fibroblast Growth Factor on Bone Regeneration in Experimental Cranial Defects Using Spongostan and Bio-Oss as Protein Carriers

Abstract

The objective of this study was to valuate 2 substances as potential carriers of fibroblast growth factor 1 (FGF-1) in a rat craniectomy model: gelatin sponge (Spongostan; Ferrosan A/S, Søborg, Denmark) and natural bone mineral (Bio-Oss; Geistlich Biomaterials, Wolhusen, Switzerland).Forty-eight adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were used. A 5-mm-diameter circular craniectomy was performed in the left parietal bone. Animals were divided into 6 experimental groups of 8 rats, each group receiving a different treatment: control (no substance added), Spongostan, Bio-Oss, FGF, FGF + Spongostan, and FGF + Bio-Oss. Animals were killed 12 weeks after surgery.Descriptive histology and stereology were used, the latter to measure the volumes of regenerated bone and Bio-Oss remaining in the defect. Analysis of variance was used to determine differences in bone regeneration between groups, and Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the volume of remaining Bio-Oss particles.Histologically, the control defects behaved like critical size defects, showing incomplete bone regeneration. Only the FGF + Spongostan group achieved nearly complete bone regeneration. Bio-Oss particles seemed to reduce centripetal bone regeneration. Spongostan by itself did not interfere with spontaneous bone healing.Stereologic measurements of the volume of new bone growth, measured in cubic millimeter, were as follows: control group, 3.86 ± 1.03; Bio-Oss, 2.26 ± 1.06; Spongostan, 3.00 ± 0.81; FGF, 3.99 ± 1.85; FGF + Bio-Oss, 3.02 ± 1.88; and FGF + Spongostan, 8.93 ± 1.28. Analysis of variance showed a statistically significant difference between the FGF + Spongostan group and the other groups (P < 0.001). Comparison among the other groups did not show significant differences.Fibroblast growth factor 1 with a Spongostan carrier has shown great efficacy for bone regeneration in cranial critical size defects in rats. Bio-Oss did not produce a regenerative effect, either alone or with FGF-1.

Mast cells and immunoexpression of FGF‐1 and Ki‐67 in rat subcutaneous tissue following the implantation of Biodentine and MTA Angelus

“…, Ng , Wulff & Wilgus ) and bone repair (Arias‐Gallo et al . ), producing and releasing several mediators, such as tryptase, transforming growth factor β and vascular endothelial growth factor (Ng , Kennelly et al . ).…”

Cranial vault reconstruction with bone morphogenetic protein, calcium phosphate, acellular dermal matrix, and calcium alginate in mice

“…Arias-Gallo et al 4 Commercial presentation has been diluted into 2.5 mL 0.9% NaCl, obtaining a concentration at 10 µg/mL. Minimal concentration recommended by the manufacturer was 1 µg/mL.…”

“…Under ideal conditions, bone architecture is rebuilt, instead of a fibrous scar, which is the common final route of other tissues 4 . However, bone restitution may be challenging, especially when donor areas become scarce or healing is inefficient [5][6][7][8][9] .…”

“…Bone autografts (BAG) keep on going as the gold standard grafts, but they carry some bias: their harvesting produce a variable degree of morbidity in donor area; they are not promptly available in many cases; they may be difficult to sculpt and fit for a certain receptor area 1,4,13 . The advent of both heterologous and synthetic grafts has increased the offer of material, but has also brought other problems, as follows: lack of osteoinduction, resorption unpredictability, and unfavourable mechanical properties 1,[14][15][16][17][18][19] .…”

“…In bone tissue, cell proliferate significantly in vitro in response to the following growth factors: BMP -especially type 2 and 7; fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2); platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF); insulin-like growth factor-1 (IFG-1); and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) 1,4 . Among them, BMP have been considered the greatest mediators either in osteogenesis and bone regeneration 18 .…”