A Mechanistic and Preclinical Assessment of BioRestore Bioactive Glass as a Synthetic Bone Graft Extender and Substitute for Osteoinduction and Spine Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Preclinical animal study. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the osteoinductivity and bone regenerative capacity of BioRestore bioactive glass. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: BioRestore is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved bone void filler that has not yet been evaluated as a bone graft extender or substitute for spine fusion. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo methods were used to compare BioRestore with other biomaterials for the capacity to promote osteodifferentiation and spinal fusion. The materials evaluated (1) absorbable collagen sponge (ACS), (2) allograft, (3) BioRestore, (4) Human Demineralized Bone Matrix (DBM), and (5) MasterGraft. For in vitro studies, rat bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSC) were cultured on the materials in either standard or osteogenic media (SM, OM), followed by quantification of osteogenic marker genes ( Runx2, Osx, Alpl, Bglap, Spp1 ) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity. Sixty female Fischer rats underwent L4-5 posterolateral fusion (PLF) with placement of 1 of 5 implants: (1) ICBG from syngeneic rats; (2) ICBG+BioRestore; (3) BioRestore alone; (4) ICBG+Allograft; or (5) ICBG+MasterGraft. Spines were harvested 8 weeks postoperatively and evaluated for bone formation and fusion via radiography, blinded manual palpation, microCT, and histology. RESULTS: After culture for 1 week, BioRestore promoted similar expression levels of Runx2 and Osx to cells grown on DBM. At the 2-week timepoint, the relative ALP activity for BioRestore-OM was significantly higher ( P <0.001) than that of ACS-OM and DBM-OM ( P <0.01) and statistically equivalent to cells grown on allograft-OM. In vivo, radiographic and microCT evaluation showed some degree of bridging bone formation in all groups tested, with the exception of BioRestore alone, which did not produce successful fusions. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the capacity of BioRestore to promote osteoinductivity in vitro. In vivo, BioRestore performed similarly to commercially available bone graft extender materials but was incapable of producing fusion as a bone graft substitute. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Sex-based Difference in Response to Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 in a Rat Posterolateral Fusion Model.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a preclinical study. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate sex-dependent differences in the bone healing response to recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) in a rat posterolateral spinal fusion model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Minimal and conflicting data exist concerning potential sex-dependent differences in rhBMP-2-mediated bone regeneration in the context of spinal fusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight female and male Sprague-Dawley rats (N=24/group), underwent L4-L5 posterolateral fusion with bilateral placement of an absorbable collagen sponge, each loaded with 5 µg of bone morphogenetic protein-2 (10 µg/animal). At eight weeks postoperative, 10 specimens of each sex were tested in flexion-extension with quantification of range of motion and stiffness. The remaining specimens were evaluated for new bone growth and successful fusion via radiography, blinded manual palpation and microcomputed tomography (microCT). Laboratory microCT quantified bone microarchitecture, and synchrotron microCT examined bone microstructure at the 1 µm level. RESULTS: Manual palpation scores differed significantly between sexes, with mean fusion scores of 2.4±0.4 in females versus 3.1±0.6 in males ( P <0.001). Biomechanical stiffness did not differ between sexes, but range of motion was significantly greater and more variable for females versus males (3.7±5.6° vs. 0.27±0.15°, P <0.005, respectively). Laboratory microCT showed significantly smaller volumes of fusion masses in females versus males (262±87 vs. 732±238 mm 3 , respectively, P <0.001) but significantly higher bone volume fraction (0.27±0.08 vs. 0.12±0.05, respectively, P <0.001). Mean trabecular thickness was not different, but trabecular number was significantly greater in females (3.1±0.5 vs. 1.5±0.4 mm -1 , respectively, P <0.001). Synchrotron microCT showed fine bone structures developing in both sexes at the eight-week time point. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates sex-dependent differences in bone regeneration induced by rhBMP-2. Further investigation is needed to uncover the extent of and mechanisms underlying these sex differences, particularly at different doses of rhBMP-2.