Aims. Extracellular matrix (ECM) is a critical determinant of tissue mechanobiology, yet remains poorly characterized in joint tissues beyond cartilage in osteoarthritis (OA). This review aimed to define the composition and architecture of non-cartilage soft joint tissue structural ECM in human OA, and to compare the changes observed in humans with those seen in animal models of the disease. Methods. A systematic search strategy, devised using relevant matrix, tissue, and disease nomenclature, was run through the MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. Demographic, clinical, and biological data were extracted from eligible studies. Bias analysis was performed. Results. A total of 161 studies were included, which covered capsule, ligaments, meniscus, skeletal muscle, synovium, and tendon in both humans and animals, and fat pad and intervertebral disc in humans only. These studies covered a wide variety of ECM features, including individual ECM components (i.e. collagens, proteoglycans, and glycoproteins), ECM architecture (i.e. collagen fibre organization and diameter), and viscoelastic properties (i.e. elastic and compressive modulus). Some ECM changes, notably calcification and the loss of collagen fibre organization, have been extensively studied across osteoarthritic tissues. However, most ECM features were only studied by one or a few papers in each tissue. When comparisons were possible, the results from animal experiments largely concurred with those from human studies, although some findings were contradictory. Conclusion. Changes in ECM composition and architecture occur throughout non-cartilage soft tissues in the osteoarthritic joint, but most of these remain poorly defined due to the low number of studies and lack of healthy comparator groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(12):703–715

Aims. Previous studies have suggested that selenium as a trace element is involved in bone health, but findings related to the specific effect of selenium on bone health remain inconclusive. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis by including all the relevant studies to elucidate the association between selenium status (dietary intake or serum selenium) and bone health indicators (bone mineral density (BMD), osteoporosis (OP), or fracture). Methods. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched to retrieve relevant articles published before 15 November 2022. Studies focusing on the correlation between selenium and BMD, OP, or fracture were included. Effect sizes included regression coefficient (β), weighted mean difference (WMD), and odds ratio (OR). According to heterogeneity, the fixed-effect or random-effect model was used to assess the association between selenium and bone health. Results. From 748 non-duplicate publications, 19 studies were included. We found a significantly positive association between dietary selenium intake (β = 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.07, p = 0.029) as well as serum selenium (β = 0.13, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.26, p = 0.046) and BMD. Consistently, those with higher selenium intake had a lower risk of OP (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.72, p = 0.001), and patients with OP had a significantly lower level of serum selenium than healthy controls (WMD = -2.01, 95% CI -3.91 to -0.12, p = 0.037). High dietary selenium intake was associated with a lower risk of hip fracture (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, p < 0.001). Conclusion. Selenium was positively associated with BMD and inversely associated with OP; dietary selenium intake was negatively associated with hip fracture. The causality and therapeutic effect of selenium on OP needs to be investigated in future studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(7):423–432

Aims. The use of 3D printing has become increasingly popular and has been widely used in orthopaedic surgery. There has been a trend towards an increasing number of publications in this field, but existing literature incorporates limited high-quality studies, and there is a lack of reports on outcomes. The aim of this study was to perform a scoping review with Level I evidence on the application and effectiveness of 3D printing. Methods. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The keywords used for the search criteria were ((3d print*) OR (rapid prototyp*) OR (additive manufactur*)) AND (orthopaedic). The inclusion criteria were: 1) use of 3D printing in orthopaedics, 2) randomized controlled trials, and 3) studies with participants/patients. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane Collaboration Tool and PEDro Score. Pooled analysis was performed. Results. Overall, 21 studies were included in our study with a pooled total of 932 participants. Pooled analysis showed that operating time (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), fluoroscopy times (p < 0.001), bone union time (p < 0.001), pain (p = 0.040), accuracy (p < 0.001), and functional scores (p < 0.001) were significantly improved with 3D printing compared to the control group. There were no significant differences in complications. Conclusion. 3D printing is a rapidly developing field in orthopaedics. Our findings show that 3D printing is advantageous in terms of operating time, blood loss, fluoroscopy times, bone union time, pain, accuracy, and function. The use of 3D printing did not increase the risk of complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):807–819

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.