Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Ameliorative effect of different mesoporous bioactive glass materials in experimental tibial defects in rats Cover

Ameliorative effect of different mesoporous bioactive glass materials in experimental tibial defects in rats

Asian Biomedicine
Volume 16 (2022): Issue 5 (October 2022)
By: Ozlem Ozmen,  Fatma Tomul and  Yusuf Sinan Sirin  
Open Access
|Jun 2023

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Experimental design and applications.
Experimental design and applications.

Figure 2.

Schematic illustration of the study.
Schematic illustration of the study.

Figure 3.

Appearance of the tibia after defect creation (arrow).
Appearance of the tibia after defect creation (arrow).

Figure 4.

XRD patterns of the MBG and Cu-MBG, Zn-MBG, and Cu–Zn-MBG samples (A) before and (B) after soaking in SBF for 28 d: □, CaCO3, Δ, Ca2SiO4, , Ca3(PO4)2, , CaSiO3, , CuO, , Zn2SiO4, , ZnCO3, and °, Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBF, simulated body fluid; XRD, X-ray diffraction.
XRD patterns of the MBG and Cu-MBG, Zn-MBG, and Cu–Zn-MBG samples (A) before and (B) after soaking in SBF for 28 d: □, CaCO3, Δ, Ca2SiO4, , Ca3(PO4)2, , CaSiO3, , CuO, , Zn2SiO4, , ZnCO3, and °, Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBF, simulated body fluid; XRD, X-ray diffraction.

Figure 5.

FTIR spectra of the MBG, Cu-MBG, Zn-MBG, and Cu–Zn-MBG samples (A) before and (B) after soaking in SBF for 28 d. FTIR, Fourier transformed infrared; MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBF, simulated body fluid.
FTIR spectra of the MBG, Cu-MBG, Zn-MBG, and Cu–Zn-MBG samples (A) before and (B) after soaking in SBF for 28 d. FTIR, Fourier transformed infrared; MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBF, simulated body fluid.

Figure 6.

Histopathological appearance of the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Defect areas (thin arrows), graft materials (thick arrows), and newly formed bone areas (white arrows), HE, bars = 100 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass.
Histopathological appearance of the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Defect areas (thin arrows), graft materials (thick arrows), and newly formed bone areas (white arrows), HE, bars = 100 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass.

Figure 7.

Collagen 1 immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Positive expressions (arrows) were observed in connective tissue. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.
Collagen 1 immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Positive expressions (arrows) were observed in connective tissue. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.

Figure 8.

BMP2 immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight positive reactions (arrows) were observed in some cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.
BMP2 immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight positive reactions (arrows) were observed in some cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.

Figure 9.

OST immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight-to-moderate immunopositive reactions (arrows) were observed, especially in osteoclastic cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; OST, osteocalcin; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.
OST immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight-to-moderate immunopositive reactions (arrows) were observed, especially in osteoclastic cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; OST, osteocalcin; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique.

Figure 10.

VEGF immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight-to-moderate immunopositive reactions (arrows) were observed, especially in osteoclastic cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.
VEGF immunohistochemical expression among the groups on the 15th and 30th days after graft application in the (A) control, (B) MBG, (C) Cu-MBG, (D) Zn-MBG, and (E) Cu–Zn-MBG groups. Slight-to-moderate immunopositive reactions (arrows) were observed, especially in osteoclastic cells. SBPT, bar = 50 μm. MBG, mesoporous bioactive glass; SBPT, streptavidin–biotin peroxidase technique; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.

Statistical analysis results of histomorphic data between the groups

Groups15 days30 days
Total augmentation area (mm2)
Control2.04 ± 0.462.44 ± 0.31
MBG7.04 ± 0.78†8.04 ± 1.35†
Cu-MBG8.84 ± 0.87†11.74 ± 1.37‡
Zn-MBG10.20 ± 0.34§12.58 ± 1.64‡
Cu/Zn-MBG12.54 ± 0.81§14.44 ± 0.89§
Defect closure rate (%)
Control28.20 ± 4.3936.40 ± 4.03
MBG44.10 ± 3.90†55.20 ± 5.30†
Cu-MBG59.20 ± 3.91‡75.60 ± 5.08‡
Zn-MBG64.50 ± 5.72‡77.20 ± 5.20‡
Cu/Zn-MBG74.80 ± 4.77§93.70 ± 2.75§
New bone area (mm2)
Control0.19 ± 0.031.54 ± 0.43
MBG0.31 ± 0.031.77 ± 0.47†
Cu-MBG1.29 ± 0.08†2.61 ± 0.37‡
Zn-MBG1.24 ± 0.13†2.35 ± 0.15‡
Cu/Zn-MBG1.91 ± 0.10§3.80 ± 0.14§
Residual material area (mm2)
Control0.00 ± 0.000.00 ± 0.00
MBG17.80 ± 0.78†7.60 ± 0.96†
Cu-MBG17.30 ± 1.41†7.30 ± 1.41†
Zn-MBG15.80 ± 2.44‡8.60 ± 1.42†
Cu/Zn-MBG12.90 ± 3.54§5.50 ± 1.26§
Osteoclast number
Control6.30 ± 1.419.00 ± 1.49
MBG12.30 ± 1.70†16.80 ± 1.61†
Cu-MBG16.60 ± 2.06‡20.60 ± 1.57‡
Zn-MBG17.10 ± 1.59‡23.30 ± 2.40‡
Cu/Zn-MBG19.70 ± 1.05§29.20 ± 2.89§
Osteoblast number
Control10.10 ± 0.9920.40 ± 1.17
MBG13.70 ± 2.66†25.20 ± 2.27†
Cu-MBG16.90 ± 1.66‡29.20 ± 1.75‡
Zn-MBG16.90 ± 2.23‡27.10 ± 2.07‡
Cu/Zn-MBG24.30 ± 1.88§33.00 ± 1.56§

Statistical analysis results of immunohistochemical scores between the groups

Col-1BMP-2OSTVEGF
15 days
Control0.50 ± 0.160.60 ± 0.510.20 ± 0.131.20 ± 0.42
MBG1.10 ± 0.56†1.20 ± 0.63†1.20 ± 0.63†1.50 ± 0.52
Cu-MBG1.50 ± 0.52†¥1.30 ± 0.48†1.30 ± 0.48†1.80 ± 0.42†
Zn-MBG1.20 ± 0.42†1.60 ± 0.51§1.30 ± 0.48†1.60 ± 0.51
Cu/Zn-MBG2.30±0.48§фψδ1.60 ± 0.69§1.80 ± 0.91§#ψф2.30 ± 0.82§¥ψф
30 days
Control0.70 ± 0.481.00 ± 0.470.80 ± 0.421.50 ± 0.52
MBG1.40 ± 0.51†1.80 ± 0.63†1.60 ± 0.51†2.10 ± 0.56†
Cu-MBG1.90 ± 0.31§¥2.20 ± 0.91‡1.90 ± 0.56†2.00 ± 0.47†
Zn-MBG1.60 ± 0.51†2.20 ± 0.63‡1.80 ± 0.78†2.20 ± 0.63†
Cu/Zn-MBG2.50 ± 0.52§ф2.40 ± 0.84§2.30 ± 0.67§2.80 ± 0.42§ψ
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/abm-2022-0027 | Journal eISSN: 1875-855X | Journal ISSN: 1905-7415
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 237 - 248
Published on: Jun 16, 2023
Published by: Chulalongkorn University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 6 issues per year
Keywords:
bone defect,
immunohistochemistry,
mesoporous bioactive glass,
pathology,
rat
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Assistive professions, nursing,
Basic medical science,
Basic medical science, other,
Clinical medicine,
Clinical medicine, other

© 2023 Ozlem Ozmen, Fatma Tomul, Yusuf Sinan Sirin, published by Chulalongkorn University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 16 (2022): Issue 5 (October 2022)Next article