↓ Skip to main content

Defective Bone Repair in C57Bl6 Mice With Acute Systemic Inflammation

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Defective Bone Repair in C57Bl6 Mice With Acute Systemic Inflammation
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-5159-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. A. Behrends, D. Hui, C. Gao, A. Awlia, Y. Al-Saran, A. Li, J. E. Henderson, P. A. Martineau

Abstract

Bone repair is initiated with a local inflammatory response to injury. The presence of systemic inflammation impairs bone healing and often leads to malunion, although the underlying mechanisms remain poorly defined. Our research objective was to use a mouse model of cortical bone repair to determine the effect of systemic inflammation on cells in the bone healing microenvironment. QUESTION/PURPOSES: (1) Does systemic inflammation, induced by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) administration affect the quantity and quality of regenerating bone in primary bone healing? (2) Does systemic inflammation alter vascularization and the number or activity of inflammatory cells, osteoblasts, and osteoclasts in the bone healing microenvironment? Cortical defects were drilled in the femoral diaphysis of female and male C57BL/6 mice aged 5 to 9 months that were treated with daily systemic injections of LPS or physiologic saline as control for 7 days. Mice were euthanized at 1 week (Control, n = 7; LPS, n = 8), 2 weeks (Control, n = 7; LPS, n = 8), and 6 weeks (Control, n = 9; LPS, n = 8) after surgery. The quantity (bone volume per tissue volume [BV/TV]) and microarchitecture (trabecular separation and thickness, porosity) of bone in the defect were quantified with time using microCT. The presence or activity of vascular endothelial cells (CD34), macrophages (F4/80), osteoblasts (alkaline phosphatase [ALP]), and osteoclasts (tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase [TRAP]) were evaluated using histochemical analyses. Only one of eight defects was bridged completely 6 weeks after surgery in LPS-injected mouse bones compared with seven of nine defects in the control mouse bones (odds ratio [OR], 0.04; 95% CI, 0.003-0.560; p = 0.007). The decrease in cortical bone in LPS-treated mice was reflected in reduced BV/TV (21% ± 4% vs 39% ± 10%; p < 0.01), increased trabecular separation (240 ± 36 μm vs 171 ± 29 μm; p < 0.01), decreased trabecular thickness (81 ± 18 μm vs 110 ± 22 μm; p = 0.02), and porosity (79% ± 4% vs 60% ± 10%; p < 0.01) at 6 weeks postoperative. Defective healing was accompanied by decreased CD34 (1.1 ± 0.6 vs 3.4 ± 0.9; p < 0.01), ALP (1.9 ± 0.9 vs 6.1 ± 3.2; p = 0.03), and TRAP (3.3 ± 4.7 vs 7.2 ± 4.0; p = 0.01) activity, and increased F4/80 (13 ± 2.6 vs 6.8 ± 1.7; p < 0.01) activity at 2 weeks postoperative. The results indicate that LPS-induced systemic inflammation reduced the amount and impaired the quality of bone regenerated in mouse femurs. The effects were associated with impaired revascularization, decreased bone turnover by osteoblasts and osteoclasts, and by increased catabolic activity by macrophages. Results from this preclinical study support clinical observations of impaired primary bone healing in patients with systemic inflammation. Based on our data, local administration of VEGF in the callus to stimulate revascularization, or transplantation of stem cells to enhance bone turnover represent potentially feasible approaches to improve outcomes in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Engineering 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,047,334
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#5,161
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,918
of 313,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#50
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.