Inflammatory Profile and Osteogenic Potential of Fracture Haematoma in Humans.

Fracture haematoma forms immediately after fracture and is considered essential for the bone healing process. Its molecular composition has been briefly investigated with our current understanding being based on animal studies. This study aims to analyse the inflammatory cytokine content of fracture haematoma in humans and determine its effect on osteoprogenitor cells. Twenty-three patients were recruited following informed consent. Peripheral blood, fracture haematoma and bone were collected. A Luminex assay on the levels of 34 cytokines was performed and autologous peripheral blood samples served as control. Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs) were isolated following collagenase digestion and functional assays were performed. Gene expression analysis of 84 key osteogenic molecules was performed. Thirty-three inflammatory cytokines were found to be significantly raised in fracture haematoma when compared to peripheral serum (p < 0.05). Amongst the most raised molecules were IL-8, IL-11 and MMP1, -2 and -3. Fracture haematoma did not significantly affect MSC proliferation, but ALP activity and calcium deposition were significantly increased in the MSCs undergoing osteogenic differentiation. Medium supplementations with fracture haematoma resulted in a statistically significant upregulation of osteogenic genes including the EGF, FGF2 and VEGFA. This seems to be the pathway involved in the osteogenic effect of fracture haematoma on bone cells. In conclusion, fracture haematoma is found to be a medium rich in inflammatory and immunomodulatory mediators. At the same time, it contains high levels of anti-inflammatory molecules, regulates osteoclastogenesis, induces angiogenesis and the production of the extracellular matrix. It appears that fracture haematoma does not affect osteoprogenitor cells proliferation as previously thought, but induces an osteogenic phenotype.

Balancing benefits and risks of glucocorticoids in rheumatic diseases and other inflammatory joint disorders: new insights from emerging data. An expert consensus paper from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO).

PURPOSE: This consensus review article considers the question of whether glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is still relevant in the treatment of rheumatic diseases, with a particular focus on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and whether its side effects can be adequately managed. Recent basic and clinical research on the molecular, cellular and clinical effects of GCs have considerably advanced our knowledge in this field. An overview of the subject seems appropriate. METHODS: This review is the result of a multidisciplinary expert working group, organised by European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis. The recent literature was surveyed and the salient evidence synthetized. RESULTS: The pathophysiological basis of RA (and other inflammatory rheumatic diseases) now strongly implicates the adaptive immune system in addition to innate mechanisms. The molecular effect of GCs and differential GC sensitivity is better understood, although exploiting this knowledge is still in its infancy. The newer treatment strategies of early and aggressive control of RA have gr eatly improved clinical outcomes, but improvements are still possible. Newer targeted anti-inflammatory drugs have made an important impact, yet they too are associated with numerous side effects. DISCUSSION: Short durations of moderate doses of GCs are generally well tolerated and have a positive benefit/risk ratio. Patients should be assessed for fracture risk and bone preserving agents and be prescribed calcium and vitamin D supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Within a strategy of a disease modifying approach to inflammatory disease, combination therapy including a GC is effective approach.

Hip fracture evaluation with alternatives of total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH): protocol for a multicentre randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures are a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide, and the number of hip fractures is expected to rise to over 6 million per year by 2050. The optimal approach for the surgical management of displaced femoral neck fractures remains unknown. Current evidence suggests the use of arthroplasty; however, there is lack of evidence regarding whether patients with displaced femoral neck fractures experience better outcomes with total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). The HEALTH trial compares outcomes following THA versus HA in patients 50 years of age or older with displaced femoral neck fractures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: HEALTH is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial where 1434 patients, 50 years of age or older, with displaced femoral neck fractures from international sites are randomised to receive either THA or HA. Exclusion criteria include associated major injuries of the lower extremity, hip infection(s) and a history of frank dementia. The primary outcome is unplanned secondary procedures and the secondary outcomes include functional outcomes, patient quality of life, mortality and hip-related complications-both within 2 years of the initial surgery. We are using minimisation to ensure balance between intervention groups for the following factors: age, prefracture living, prefracture functional status, American Society for Anesthesiologists (ASA) Class and centre number. Data analysts and the HEALTH Steering Committee are blinded to the surgical allocation throughout the trial. Outcome analysis will be performed using a χ(2) test (or Fisher's exact test) and Cox proportional hazards modelling estimate. All results will be presented with 95% CIs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The HEALTH trial has received local and McMaster University Research Ethics Board (REB) approval (REB#: 06-151). RESULTS: Outcomes from the primary manuscript will be disseminated through publications in academic journals and presentations at relevant orthopaedic conferences. We will communicate trial results to all participating sites. Participating sites will communicate results with patients who have indicated an interest in knowing the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The HEALTH trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00556842).

Emerging bone healing therapies.

Fracture healing is a biologically optimized process. Despite the expectation of unimpaired healing, approximately 5% to 10% of the 7.9 million fractures sustained annually in the United States have difficulty achieving union. Not only does this cause morbidity for patients, but also enormous healthcare and socioeconomic costs. Hence, there is a compelling need to find novel therapies to enhance fracture healing. In this article, we summarize current data on therapies to enhance skeletal healing and review their suggested biologic functions, proposed clinical applications, and known efficacies.

Electrical stimulation for long-bone fracture-healing: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Bone stimulation represents a $500 million market in the United States. The use of electromagnetic stimulation in the treatment of fractures is common; however, the efficacy of this modality remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effect of electromagnetic stimulation on long-bone fracture-healing. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and all Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews) for trials of electromagnetic stimulation and bone repair, in any language, published from the inception of the database to April 2008. In addition, we searched by hand seven relevant journals published between 1980 and April 2008 and the bibliographies of eligible trials. Eligible trials enrolled patients with long-bone lesions, randomly assigned them to electromagnetic stimulation or a control group, and reported on bone-healing. Information on the methodological quality, stimulation device, duration of treatment, patient demographics, and all clinical outcomes were independently extracted by two reviewers. RESULTS: Of 2546 citations obtained in the literature search, eleven articles met the inclusion criteria. Evidence from four trials reporting on 106 delayed or ununited fractures demonstrated an overall nonsignificant pooled relative risk of 1.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.8 to 3.8; p = 0.15; I(2) = 60.4%) in favor of electromagnetic stimulation. Single studies found a positive benefit of electromagnetic stimulation on callus formation in femoral intertrochanteric osteotomies, a limited benefit for conservatively managed Colles fracture or for lower limb-lengthening, and no benefit on limb-length imbalance and need for reoperation in surgically managed pseudarthroses or on time to clinical healing in tibial stress fractures. Pain was reduced in one of the four trials assessing this outcome. CONCLUSIONS: While our pooled analysis does not show a significant impact of electromagnetic stimulation on delayed unions or ununited long-bone fractures, methodological limitations and high between-study heterogeneity leave the impact of electromagnetic stimulation on fracture-healing uncertain.

Healing of segmental bone defects by direct percutaneous gene delivery: effect of vector dose.

Previous studies have demonstrated the ability of direct adenoviral BMP-2 (Ad.BMP-2) gene delivery to enhance bone repair. Nevertheless, in studies using a rat segmental defect model, it has not proved possible to achieve reliably full osseous union in all animals. To address this issue, we evaluated the effect of vector dose on healing. Critical-size defects were created in the right femora of 27 Sprague-Dawley rats. The defects received a single, intralesional, percutaneous injection of 2.7 x 10(7) (low dose), 2.7 x 10(8) (medium dose), or 2.7 x 10(9) (high dose) plaque-forming units of Ad.BMP-2. After 8 weeks, femora were evaluated by X-ray, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, microcomputed tomography (microCT), and histology. The high dose of vector bridged 100%, the medium dose 11%, and the low dose 25% of the defects, as evaluated by X-ray and microCT imaging. Bone mineral content and bone volume of the defects receiving the high dose of vector were significantly higher than those of both groups receiving lower doses. Histologically, defects treated with the high dose were filled by trabecular bone and small amounts of cartilage, whereas large areas of fibrous tissue and cartilage remained in the defects receiving lower doses. However, the newly formed bone lacked the structural organization of native bone, suggesting that further maturation is necessary.

Differential inhibition of fracture healing by non-selective and cyclooxygenase-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) specifically inhibit cyclooxygenase (COX) activity and are widely used as anti-arthritics, post-surgical analgesics, and for the relief of acute musculoskeletal pain. Recent studies suggest that non-specific NSAIDs, which inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2 isoforms, delay bone healing. The objectives of this study were 2-fold; first, to measure the relative changes in the normal expression of COX-1 and COX-2 mRNAs over a 42 day period of fracture healing and second, to compare the effects of a commonly used non-specific NSAID, ketorolac, with a COX-2 specific NSAID, Parecoxib (a pro-drug of valdecoxib), on this process. Simple, closed, transverse fractures were generated in femora of male Sprague-Dawley rats weighing approximately 450 g each. Total RNA was prepared from the calluses obtained prior to fracture and at 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, 21, 35 and 42 days post-fracture and levels of COX-1 and COX-2 mRNA were measured using real time PCR. While the relative levels of COX-1 mRNA remained constant over a 21-day period, COX-2 mRNA levels showed peak expression during the first 14 days of healing and returned to basal levels by day 21. Mechanical properties of the calluses were then assessed at 21 and 35 days post-fracture in untreated animals and animals treated with either ketorolac or high or low dose parecoxib. At both 21 and 35 days after fracture, calluses in the group treated with the ketorolac showed a significant reduction in mechanical strength and stiffness when compared with controls (p<0.05). At the 21-day time point, calluses of the parecoxib treated animals showed a lower mean mechanical strength than controls, but the inhibition was not statistically significant. Based on physical analysis of the bones, 3 of 12 (25%) of the ketorolac-treated and 1 of 12 (8%) of the high dose parecoxib-treated animals showed failure to unite their fractures by 21 days, while all fractures in both groups showed union by 35 days. Histological analysis at 21 days showed that the calluses in the ketorolac-treated group contained substantial amounts of residual cartilage while neither the control nor the parecoxib-treated animals showed comparable amounts of cartilage at this stage. These results demonstrate that ketorolac and parecoxib delay fracture healing in this model, but in this study daily administration of ketorolac, a non-selective COX inhibitor had a greater affect on this process. They further demonstrate that a COX-2 selective NSAID, such as parecoxib (valdecoxib), has only a small effect on delaying fracture healing even at doses that are known to fully inhibit prostaglandin production.