Bone regeneration and repair are crucial to ambulation and quality of life. Factors such as poor general health, serious medical comorbidities, chronic inflammation, and ageing can lead to delayed healing and nonunion of fractures, and persistent bone defects. Bioengineering strategies to heal bone often involve grafting of autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) or mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with biocompatible scaffolds. While BMAC shows promise, variability in its efficacy exists due to discrepancies in MSC concentration and robustness, and immune cell composition. Understanding the mechanisms by which macrophages and lymphocytes – the main cellular components in BMAC – interact with MSCs could suggest novel strategies to enhance bone healing. Macrophages are polarized into pro-inflammatory (M1) or anti-inflammatory (M2) phenotypes, and influence cell metabolism and tissue regeneration via the secretion of cytokines and other factors. T cells, especially helper T1 (Th1) and Th17, promote inflammation and osteoclastogenesis, whereas Th2 and regulatory T (Treg) cells have anti-inflammatory pro-reconstructive effects, thereby supporting osteogenesis. Crosstalk among macrophages, T cells, and MSCs affects the bone microenvironment and regulates the local immune response. Manipulating the proportion and interactions of these cells presents an opportunity to alter the local regenerative capacity of bone, which potentially could enhance clinical outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(9):462–473

Aims

Platelet concentrates, like platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet lysate (PL), are widely used in regenerative medicine, especially in bone regeneration. However, the lack of standard procedures and controls leads to high variability in the obtained results, limiting their regular clinical use. Here, we propose the use of platelet-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) as an off-the-shelf alternative for PRP and PL for bone regeneration. In this article, we evaluate the effect of PL-derived EVs on the biocompatibility and differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs).

Objectives. Long bone defects often require surgical intervention for functional restoration. The ‘gold standard’ treatment is autologous bone graft (ABG), usually from the patient’s iliac crest. However, autograft is plagued by complications including limited supply, donor site morbidity, and the need for an additional surgery. Thus, alternative therapies are being actively investigated. Autologous bone marrow (BM) is considered as a candidate due to the presence of both endogenous reparative cells and growth factors. We aimed to compare the therapeutic potentials of autologous bone marrow aspirate (BMA) and ABG, which has not previously been done. Methods. We compared the efficacy of coagulated autologous BMA and ABG for the repair of ulnar defects in New Zealand White rabbits. Segmental defects (14 mm) were filled with autologous clotted BM or morcellized autograft, and healing was assessed four and 12 weeks postoperatively. Harvested ulnas were subjected to radiological, micro-CT, histological, and mechanical analyses. Results. Comparable results were obtained with autologous BMA clot and ABG, except for the quantification of new bone by micro-CT. Significantly more bone was found in the ABG-treated ulnar defects than in those treated with autologous BMA clot. This is possibly due to the remnants of necrotic autograft fragments that persisted within the healing defects at week 12 post-surgery. Conclusion. As similar treatment outcomes were achieved by the two strategies, the preferred treatment would be one that is associated with a lower risk of complications. Hence, these results demonstrate that coagulated BMA can be considered as an alternative autogenous therapy for long bone healing. Cite this article: Z. X. H. Lim, B. Rai, T. C. Tan, A. K. Ramruttun, J. H. Hui, V. Nurcombe, S. H. Teoh, S. M. Cool. Autologous bone marrow clot as an alternative to autograft for bone defect healing. Bone Joint Res 2019;8:107–117. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.83.BJR-2018-0096.R1

During the last decades, several research groups have used bisphosphonates for local application to counteract secondary bone resorption after bone grafting, to improve implant fixation or to control bone resorption caused by bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs). We focused on zoledronate (a bisphosphonate) due to its greater antiresorptive potential over other bisphosphonates. Recently, it has become obvious that the carrier is of importance to modulate the concentration and elution profile of the zoledronic acid locally. Incorporating one fifth of the recommended systemic dose of zoledronate with different apatite matrices and types of bone defects has been shown to enhance bone regeneration significantly in vivo. We expect the local delivery of zoledronate to overcome the limitations and side effects associated with systemic usage; however, we need to know more about the bioavailability and the biological effects. The local use of BMP-2 and zoledronate as a combination has a proven additional effect on bone regeneration. This review focuses primarily on the local use of zoledronate alone, or in combination with bone anabolic factors, in various preclinical models mimicking different orthopaedic conditions.

Cite this article: I. Qayoom, D. B. Raina, A. Širka, Š. Tarasevičius, M. Tägil, A. Kumar, L. Lidgren. Anabolic and antiresorptive actions of locally delivered bisphosphonates for bone repair: A review. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:548–560. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.710.BJR-2018-0015.R2.

Large bone defects remain a tremendous clinical challenge. There is growing evidence in support of treatment strategies that direct defect repair through an endochondral route, involving a cartilage intermediate. While culture-expanded stem/progenitor cells are being evaluated for this purpose, these cells would compete with endogenous repair cells for limited oxygen and nutrients within ischaemic defects. Alternatively, it may be possible to employ extracellular vesicles (EVs) secreted by culture-expanded cells for overcoming key bottlenecks to endochondral repair, such as defect vascularization, chondrogenesis, and osseous remodelling. While mesenchymal stromal/stem cells are a promising source of therapeutic EVs, other donor cells should also be considered. The efficacy of an EV-based therapeutic will likely depend on the design of companion scaffolds for controlled delivery to specific target cells. Ultimately, the knowledge gained from studies of EVs could one day inform the long-term development of synthetic, engineered nanovesicles. In the meantime, EVs harnessed from in vitro cell culture have near-term promise for use in bone regenerative medicine. This narrative review presents a rationale for using EVs to improve the repair of large bone defects, highlights promising cell sources and likely therapeutic targets for directing repair through an endochondral pathway, and discusses current barriers to clinical translation.

Cite this article: E. Ferreira, R. M. Porter. Harnessing extracellular vesicles to direct endochondral repair of large bone defects. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:263–273. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.74.BJR-2018-0006.