Corticosteroids are prescribed for the treatment of many medical conditions and their adverse effects on bone, including steroid-associated osteoporosis and osteonecrosis, are well documented. Core decompression is performed to treat osteonecrosis, but the results are variable. As steroids may affect bone turnover, this study was designed to investigate bone healing within a bone tunnel after core decompression in an experimental model of steroid-associated osteonecrosis. A total of five 28-week-old New Zealand rabbits were used to establish a model of steroid-induced osteonecrosis and another five rabbits served as controls. Two weeks after the induction of osteonecrosis, core decompression was performed by creating a bone tunnel 3 mm in diameter in both distal femora of each rabbit in both the experimental osteonecrosis and control groups. An In the osteonecrosis group all measurements of bone healing and maturation were lower compared with the control group. Impaired osteogenesis and remodelling within the bone tunnel was demonstrated in the steroid-induced osteonecrosis, accompanied by inferior mechanical properties of the bone. We have confirmed impaired bone healing in a model of bone defects in rabbits with pulsed administration of corticosteroids. This finding may be important in the development of strategies for treatment to improve the prognosis of fracture healing or the repair of bone defects in patients receiving steroid treatment.
Impacted bone allograft is often used in revision joint replacement. Hydroxyapatite granules have been suggested as a substitute or to enhance morcellised bone allograft. We hypothesised that adding osteogenic protein-1 to a composite of bone allograft and non-resorbable hydroxyapatite granules (ProOsteon) would improve the incorporation of bone and implant fixation. We also compared the response to using ProOsteon alone against bone allograft used in isolation. We implanted two non-weight-bearing hydroxyapatite-coated implants into each proximal humerus of six dogs, with each implant surrounded by a concentric 3 mm gap. These gaps were randomly allocated to four different procedures in each dog: 1) bone allograft used on its own; 2) ProOsteon used on its own; 3) allograft and ProOsteon used together; or 4) allograft and ProOsteon with the addition of osteogenic protein-1. After three weeks osteogenic protein-1 increased bone formation and the energy absorption of implants grafted with allograft and ProOsteon. A composite of allograft, ProOsteon and osteogenic protein-1 was comparable, but not superior to, allograft used on its own. ProOsteon alone cannot be recommended as a substitute for allograft around non-cemented implants, but should be used to extend the volume of the graft, preferably with the addition of a growth factor.
