Biomaterials for Intervertebral Disc Regeneration

The intervertebral disc (IVD) is a complex avascular organ of viscoelastic properties. The current research focus is to regenerate and to partially restore a degenerated IVD by ‘smart’ biomaterials in combination of cell therapy and/or growth factors. For the two tissues of the IVD, that is, the nucleus pulposus (NP) and the annulus fibrosus (AF), biomaterials of different mechanical properties are needed. The ideal biomaterial to restore the water-rich NP and the tensile-force resistant AF has not been identified yet. The lack of blood vessels and the relative scarcity of specially adapted cells of the IVD organ demand novel concepts of tissue-engineered biological approaches to regenerate or replace the IVD. Injectable biodegradable hydrogels with swelling properties are in focus for NP replacement, whereas electrospun biphasic composites and silk, among other biodegradable polymers, are discussed for AF reinforcement.

Intervertebral disc regeneration or repair with biomaterials and stem cell therapy--feasible or fiction?

The "gold standard" for treatment of intervertebral disc herniations and degenerated discs is still spinal fusion, corresponding to the saying "no disc - no pain". Mechanical prostheses, which are currently implanted, do only have medium outcome success and have relatively high re-operation rates. Here, we discuss some of the biological intervertebral disc replacement approaches, which can be subdivided into at least two classes in accordance to the two different tissue types, the nucleus pulposus (NP) and the annulus fibrosus (AF). On the side of NP replacement hydrogels have been extensively tested in vitro and in vivo. However, these gels are usually a trade-off between cell biocompatibility and load-bearing capacity, hydrogels which fulfill both are still lacking. On the side of AF repair much less is known and the question of the anchoring of implants is still to be addressed. New hope for cell therapy comes from developmental biology investigations on the existence of intervertebral disc progenitor cells, which would be an ideal cell source for cell therapy. Also notochordal cells (remnants of the embryonic notochord) have been recently pushed back into focus since these cells have regenerative potential and can activate disc cells. Growth factor treatment and molecular therapies could be less problematic. The biological solutions for NP and AF replacement are still more fiction than fact. However, tissue engineering just scratched the tip of the iceberg, more satisfying solutions are yet to be added to the biomedical pipeline.

Which biomaterials may promote periodontal regeneration in intrabony periodontal defects? A systematic review of preclinical studies.

OBJECTIVE To systematically analyze the regenerative effect of the available biomaterials either alone or in various combinations for the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects as evaluated in preclinical histologic studies. DATA SOURCES A protocol covered all aspects of the systematic review methodology. A literature search was performed in Medline, including hand searching. Combinations of searching terms and several criteria were applied for study identification, selection, and inclusion. The preliminary outcome variable was periodontal regeneration after reconstructive surgery obtained with the various regenerative materials, as demonstrated through histologic/ histomorphometric analysis. New periodontal ligament, new cementum, and new bone formation as a linear measurement in mm or as a percentage of the instrumented root length were recorded. Data were extracted based on the general characteristics, study characteristics, methodologic characteristics, and conclusions. Study selection was limited to preclinical studies involving histologic analysis, evaluating the use of potential regenerative materials (ie, barrier membranes, grafting materials, or growth factors/proteins) for the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects. Any type of biomaterial alone or in various combinations was considered. All studies reporting histologic outcome measures with a healing period of at least 6 weeks were included. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the data. CONCLUSION Flap surgery in conjunction with most of the evaluated biomaterials used either alone or in various combinations has been shown to promote periodontal regeneration to a greater extent than control therapy (flap surgery without biomaterials). Among the used biomaterials, autografts revealed the most favorable outcomes, whereas the use of most biologic factors showed inferior results compared to flap surgery.

Pre-clinical in vivo models for the screening of bone biomaterials for oral/craniofacial indications: focus on small-animal models.

Preclinical in vivo experimental studies are performed for evaluating proof-of-principle concepts, safety and possible unwanted reactions of candidate bone biomaterials before proceeding to clinical testing. Specifically, models involving small animals have been developed for screening bone biomaterials for their potential to enhance bone formation. No single model can completely recreate the anatomic, physiologic, biomechanic and functional environment of the human mouth and jaws. Relevant aspects regarding physiology, anatomy, dimensions and handling are discussed in this paper to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of small-animal models. Model selection should be based not on the 'expertise' or capacities of the team, but rather on a scientifically solid rationale, and the animal model selected should reflect the question for which an answer is sought. The rationale for using heterotopic or orthotopic testing sites, and intraosseous, periosseous or extraskeletal defect models, is discussed. The paper also discusses the relevance of critical size defect modeling, with focus on calvarial defects in rodents. In addition, the rabbit sinus model and the capsule model in the rat mandible are presented and discussed in detail. All animal experiments should be designed with care and include sample-size and study-power calculations, thus allowing generation of meaningful data. Moreover, animal experiments are subject to ethical approval by the relevant authority. All procedures and the postoperative handling and care, including postoperative analgesics, should follow best practice.

Biomaterials for promoting periodontal regeneration in human intrabony defects: a systematic review

Intrabony periodontal defects are a frequent complication of periodontitis and, if left untreated, may negatively affect long-term tooth prognosis. The optimal outcome of treatment in intrabony defects is considered to be the absence of bleeding on probing, the presence of shallow pockets associated with periodontal regeneration (i.e. formation of new root cementum with functionally orientated inserting periodontal ligament fibers connected to new alveolar bone) and no soft-tissue recession. A plethora of different surgical techniques, often including implantation of various types of bone graft and/or bone substitutes, root surface demineralization, guided tissue regeneration, growth and differentiation factors, enamel matrix proteins or various combinations thereof, have been employed to achieve periodontal regeneration. Despite positive observations in animal models and successful outcomes reported for many of the available regenerative techniques and materials in patients, including histologic reports, robust information on the degree to which reported clinical improvements reflect true periodontal regeneration does not exist. Thus, the aim of this review was to summarize, in a systematic manner, the available histologic evidence on the effect of reconstructive periodontal surgery using various types of biomaterials to enhance periodontal wound healing/regeneration in human intrabony defects. In addition, the inherent problems associated with performing human histologic studies and in interpreting the results, as well as certain ethical considerations, are discussed. The results of the present systematic review indicate that periodontal regeneration in human intrabony defects can be achieved to a variable extent using a range of methods and materials. Periodontal regeneration has been observed following the use of a variety of bone grafts and substitutes, guided tissue regeneration, biological factors and combinations thereof. Combination approaches appear to provide the best outcomes, whilst implantation of alloplastic material alone demonstrated limited, to no, periodontal regeneration.

OsteoMacs: Key players around bone biomaterials.

Osteal macrophages (OsteoMacs) are a special subtype of macrophage residing in bony tissues. Interesting findings from basic research have pointed to their vast and substantial roles in bone biology by demonstrating their key function in bone formation and remodeling. Despite these essential findings, much less information is available concerning their response to a variety of biomaterials used for bone regeneration with the majority of investigation primarily focused on their role during the foreign body reaction. With respect to biomaterials, it is well known that cells derived from the monocyte/macrophage lineage are one of the first cell types in contact with implanted biomaterials. Here they demonstrate extremely plastic phenotypes with the ability to differentiate towards classical M1 or M2 macrophages, or subsequently fuse into osteoclasts or multinucleated giant cells (MNGCs). These MNGCs have previously been characterized as foreign body giant cells and associated with biomaterial rejection, however more recently their phenotypes have been implicated with wound healing and tissue regeneration by studies demonstrating their expression of key M2 markers around biomaterials. With such contrasting hypotheses, it becomes essential to better understand their roles to improve the development of osteo-compatible and osteo-promotive biomaterials. This review article expresses the necessity to further study OsteoMacs and MNGCs to understand their function in bone biomaterial tissue integration including dental/orthopedic implants and bone grafting materials.