STUDY OF BIOCHEMICAL MARKERS OF OSTEOGENESIS IN CASE OF BONE ALLOGRAFTS INCORPORATION IN RATS WITH FOLLOWED AFTER SURGERY ADMINISTRATION OF CISPLATIN AT THE DIFFERENT METHODS OF IMPLANT STERILIZATION

Authors

  • Oleg Vyrva Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0597-4472
  • Yanina Golovina Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1605-9109
  • Frieda Leontyeva Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine
  • Roman Malyk Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9070-4834

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872021442-48

Keywords:

Biochemical markers of bone metabolism, remodelling of bone allografts, sterilisation, γ-ionisation, cisplatyn, rats

Abstract

Bone allografts are commonly used for surgical treatment of cancer patients. However, such complications as violation of allograft fusion, its lysis and fractures, infection lead to additional research in this field of medicine. Objective. To study changes in biochemical osteogenesis markers under the action of cytostatics on the process of incorporation of bone allografts. Methods. The work was performed on 20 male white rats (age at the beginning of the experiment 5–6 months). All animals have a perforated defect in the distal metaphysis of the femur filled with bone allograft (diameter 2 mm, height 3 mm), γ-radiation sterilized (Control-1 and Experiment-1) or saturation of the antibiotics sterilized (Control-2 and Experiment-2). In groups «Control» 14 days after implantation intraperitoneally injected 2.0–2.4 ml of 0.9 % sodium chloride solution, in the groups «Experiment» — cisplatin at a dose of 2.5 mg/ kg
once. 30 days after surgery, blood glycoproteins, total protein, Ca, chondroitin sulfates, acidic and alkaline phosphatase activity were evaluated. The index of mineralization (ratio of alkaline to acid phosphatases), degree is analyzed mineralization (ratio of calcium to protein). Results. In the experimental groups, compared with the control, a significant decrease in total protein and values was determined: total calcium, which indicates the suppression of processes mineralization during remodeling of bone tissue of the recipient and allograft. The highest indicators of activity acid phosphatase were recorded in groups Experiment-1 and Experiment-2, reflecting the predominance of resorption over bone formation. The degree of mineralization in the experimental groups was higher than in the control, and the mineralization index was significantly smaller. Conclusions. The detected changes in the values of biochemical markers of bone metabolism reflect the negative effect of cisplatin on osteogenesis under the conditions of allograft implantation, which leads to the lack of their fusion with the recipient bone.

Author Biographies

Oleg Vyrva, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

MD, Prof. in Traumatology and Orthopаedics

Yanina Golovina, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

PhD in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

Frieda Leontyeva, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

PhD in Biol. Sci

Roman Malyk, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

PhD in Traumatology and Orthopаedics

References

  1. Gautam, D., Arora, N., Gupta, S., George, J., & Malhotra, R. (2021). Megaprosthesis versus allograft prosthesis composite for the management of massive skeletal defects: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 14(3), 255-270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-021-09707-6
  2. Gharedaghi, M., Peivandi, M. T., & Mazloomi, M. (2016). Evaluation of clinical results and complications of structural allograft reconstruction after bone tumor surgery. The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery, 4(3), 236–242
  3. Vyrva, O., Golovina, Y., Malyk, R., & Golovina, О. (2020). Systematic review and meta-analysis of modular endoprosthesis and allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction results after bone tumor resection. Orthopaedics, traumatology and prosthetics, (2), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-5987202025-15. (in Ukrainian)
  4. Nguyen, H., Morgan, D. A., & Forwood, M. R. (2006). Sterilization of allograft bone: Effects of gamma irradiation on allograft biology and biomechanics. Cell and Tissue Banking, 8(2), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10561-006-9020-1
  5. Man, W. Y., Monni, T., Jenkins, R., & Roberts, P. (2016). Post-operative infection with fresh frozen allograft: Reported outcomes of a hospital-based bone bank over 14 years. Cell and Tissue Banking, 17(2), 269-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10561-016-9547-8
  6. Islam, A., Chapin, K., Moore, E., Ford, J., Rimnac, C., & Akkus, O. (2016). Gamma radiation sterilization reduces the high-cycle fatigue life of allograft bone. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, 474(3), 827-835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-015-4589-y
  7. Masheiko, I. V. (2017). Biochemical markers for the evaluation of bone tissue remodeling in osteopenia and osteoporosis. Journal of the Grodno State Medical University, 2, 149–153. Available from: http://journal-grsmu.by/index.php/ojs/article/view/2086. (in Russian)
  8. European Convention for the protection of vertebrate animals used for research and other scientific purposes. Strasbourg, 18 March 1986.
  9. On protection of animals from cruel treatment: Law of Ukraine № 3447-IV of February 21, 2006. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/cgi-bin/laws/main.cgi?nreg=3447-15.
  10. Vyrva, O., Holovina, Y., Ashukina, N., Malyk, R., & Danyshchuk, Z. (2021). Effects of gamma radiation and post-operative cisplatin injection on the incorporation of bone allografts in rats. Ukrainian Journal of Radiology and Oncology, 29(3), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.46879/ukroj.3.2021.51-62
  11. Leontieva, F. S., & Morozenko, D. V. (2016). Biochemical markers of connective tissue metabolism in osteochondrosis of the lumbar spine. Pivdennoukrayinsʹkyy medychnyy naukovyy zhurnal, 13, 100–102. Retrived from: http://medfoundation.od.ua › zhurnaly›13_2016 (in Russian)
  12. Morozenko, D. V., & Leontieva, F. S. (2016). Research methods markers of connective tissue metabolism in modern clinical and experimental medicine. Molodyy vchenyy, 2(29), 168–172. Retrived from: http://molodyvcheny.in.ua/files/journal/2016/2/41.pdf. (in Ukrainian)
  13. Karpishchenko, A. I. (2013). Medical laboratory technology: A guide to clinical laboratory diagnostics, in 2 volumes. Moscow: Geotar-Media. Retrived from:https://www.rosmedlib.ru/book/ISBN9785970422748.html. (in Russian)
  14. Sohn, H., & Oh, J. (2019). Review of bone Graft and bone substitutes with an emphasis on fracture surgeries. Biomaterials Research, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40824-019-0157-y
  15. Hornicek, F. J., Gebhardt, M. C., Tomford, W. W., Sorger, J. I., Zavatta, M., Menzner, J. P., & Mankin, H. J. (2001). Factors affecting Nonunion of the allograft-host Junction. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 382, 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200101000-00014
  16. Russell, N., Oliver, R. A., & Walsh, W. R. (2013). The effect of sterilization methods on the osteoconductivity of allograft bone in a critical-sized bilateral tibial defect model in rabbits. Biomaterials, 34(33), 8185-8194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.022
  17. Korzh, M., Vorontsov, P., Ashukina, N., Maltseva, V., Nikolchenko, O., & Gusak, V. (2019). Bone regeneration during use of allo- and xenograftsin combination with bioactive blood serum factors. Orthopaedics, traumatology and prosthetics, (2), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-5987201925-12. (in Ukrainian)
  18. Aponte-Tinao, L. A., Ayerza, M. A., Albergo, J. I., & Farfalli, G. L. (2019). Do massive allograft reconstructions for tumors of the femur and tibia survive 10 or more years after implantation? Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, 478(3), 517-524. https://doi.org/10.1097/corr.0000000000000806
  19. Stine, K. C., Wahl, E. C., Liu, L., Skinner, R. A., VanderSchilden, J., Bunn, R. C., ... & Lumpkin, C. K. (2013). Cisplatin inhibits bone healing during distraction osteogenesis. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 32(3), 464-470. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.22527

Downloads

How to Cite

Vyrva, O. ., Golovina, Y., Leontyeva, F. ., & Malyk, R. . (2023). STUDY OF BIOCHEMICAL MARKERS OF OSTEOGENESIS IN CASE OF BONE ALLOGRAFTS INCORPORATION IN RATS WITH FOLLOWED AFTER SURGERY ADMINISTRATION OF CISPLATIN AT THE DIFFERENT METHODS OF IMPLANT STERILIZATION. ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY and PROSTHETICS, (4), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872021442-48

Issue

No. 4 (2021)

Section

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Oleg Vyrva, Yanina Golovina, Frieda Leontyeva, Roman Malyk

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The authors retain the right of authorship of their manuscript and pass the journal the right of the first publication of this article, which automatically become available from the date of publication under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published manuscript with mandatory linking to authors of the original research and the first publication of this one in this journal.

Authors have the right to enter into a separate supplemental agreement on the additional non-exclusive distribution of manuscript in the form in which it was published by the journal (i.e. to put work in electronic storage of an institution or publish as a part of the book) while maintaining the reference to the first publication of the manuscript in this journal.

The editorial policy of the journal allows authors and encourages manuscript accommodation online (i.e. in storage of an institution or on the personal websites) as before submission of the manuscript to the editorial office, and during its editorial processing because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of the published manuscript citation (see The Effect of Open Access).