Evaluating the Effect of Non-cellular Bioactive Glass-Containing Scaffolds on Osteogenesis and Angiogenesis in in vivo Animal Bone Defect Models.

The use of bone scaffolds to replace injured or diseased bone has many advantages over the currently used autologous and allogeneic options in clinical practice. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for non-cellular scaffolds containing bioactive glass on osteogenesis and angiogenesis in animal bone defect models. Studies that reported results of osteogenesis via micro-CT and results of angiogenesis via Microfil perfusion or immunohistochemistry were included in the review. A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus was carried out in November 2019 from which nine studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Despite the significant heterogeneity in the composition of the scaffolds used in each study, it could be concluded that scaffolds containing bioactive glass improve bone regeneration in these models, both by osteogenic and angiogenic measures. Incorporation of additional elements into the glass network, using additives, and using biochemical factors generally had a beneficial effect. Comparing the different compositions of non-cellular bioactive glass containing scaffolds is however difficult due to the heterogeneity in bioactive glass compositions, fabrication methods and biochemical additives used.

Therapeutic efficacy of different routes of mesenchymal stem cell administration in corneal injury.

PURPOSE: Corneal injuries are associated with significant impairment in vision. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been shown to limit inflammation and promote tissue repair at the ocular surface. Here, we evaluate the efficacies of different modes of MSC delivery (topical, subconjunctival, intraperitoneal [IP] and intravenous [IV]) to promote tissue repair and restore corneal transparency in a murine model of corneal injury. METHODS: MSCs were purified from the bone marrow of C57BL/6  mice and expanded using plastic adherence in vitro. Corneal injury was created using an Algerbrush, and 0.5 × 106 MSCs/mouse were administered via topical, subconjunctival, IP or IV routes. Qdot-labeled MSCs were employed to determine the effect of route of administration on corneal and conjunctival MSC frequencies. Corneal opacity scores were calculated using ImageJ. Expression of inflammatory cytokines was quantified by qPCR, and infiltration of CD45+ cells was evaluated by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Subconjunctival or IV administration results in increased frequencies of MSCs in ocular surface tissues following corneal injury, relative to topical or intraperitoneal delivery. Subconjunctival or IV administration reduces: (i) corneal opacity, (ii) tissue fibrosis as quantified by α-Sma expression, (iii) the expression of inflammatory cytokines (Il-1ß and Tnf-α) and (iv) CD45+ inflammatory cell infiltration relative to untreated injured control animals. Administration via subconjunctival or IV routes was observed to accelerate corneal repair by restoring tissue architecture and epithelial integrity. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that subconjunctival or IV delivery of MSCs has superior therapeutic efficacy compared to topical or IP delivery following corneal injury.

Are the Biological and Biomechanical Properties of Meniscal Scaffolds Reflected in Clinical Practice? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

The aim of this PRISMA review was to assess whether the CMI and Actifit scaffolds, when used in clinical practice, improve clinical outcomes and demonstrate the ideal biological and biomechanical properties of scaffolds: being chondroprotective, porous, resorbable, able to mature and promote regeneration of tissue. This was done by only including studies that assessed clinical outcome and used a scale to assess both integrity of the scaffold and its effects on articular cartilage via MRI. A search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov. 2457 articles were screened, from which eight studies were selected: four used Actifit, three used CMI and one compared the two. All studies reported significant improvement in at least one clinical outcome compared to baseline. Some studies suggested that the scaffolds appeared to show porosity, mature, resorb and/or have possible chondroprotective effects, as assessed by MRI. The evidence for clinical translation is limited by differences in study methodology and small sample sizes, but is promising in terms of improving clinical outcomes in the short to mid-term. Higher level evidence, with MRI and histological evaluation of the scaffold and articular cartilage, is now needed to further determine whether these scaffolds exhibit these useful properties.