Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 

About: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an academic journal published by BioMed Central. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medicine & Orthopedic surgery. It has an ISSN identifier of 1749-799X. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 4164 publications have been published receiving 52119 citations. The journal is also known as: Orthopaedic surgery and research.

Bone regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, and future directions

Abstract: This review analyzes the literature of bone grafts and introduces tissue engineering as a strategy in this field of orthopedic surgery. We evaluated articles concerning bone grafts; analyzed characteristics, advantages, and limitations of the grafts; and provided explanations about bone-tissue engineering technologies. Many bone grafting materials are available to enhance bone healing and regeneration, from bone autografts to graft substitutes; they can be used alone or in combination. Autografts are the gold standard for this purpose, since they provide osteogenic cells, osteoinductive growth factors, and an osteoconductive scaffold, all essential for new bone growth. Autografts carry the limitations of morbidity at the harvesting site and limited availability. Allografts and xenografts carry the risk of disease transmission and rejection. Tissue engineering is a new and developing option that had been introduced to reduce limitations of bone grafts and improve the healing processes of the bone fractures and defects. The combined use of scaffolds, healing promoting factors, together with gene therapy, and, more recently, three-dimensional printing of tissue-engineered constructs may open new insights in the near future.

Effects of obesity on bone metabolism

Abstract: Obesity is traditionally viewed to be beneficial to bone health because of well-established positive effect of mechanical loading conferred by body weight on bone formation, despite being a risk factor for many other chronic health disorders. Although body mass has a positive effect on bone formation, whether the mass derived from an obesity condition or excessive fat accumulation is beneficial to bone remains controversial. The underline pathophysiological relationship between obesity and bone is complex and continues to be an active research area. Recent data from epidemiological and animal studies strongly support that fat accumulation is detrimental to bone mass. To our knowledge, obesity possibly affects bone metabolism through several mechanisms. Because both adipocytes and osteoblasts are derived from a common multipotential mesenchymal stem cell, obesity may increase adipocyte differentiation and fat accumulation while decrease osteoblast differentiation and bone formation. Obesity is associated with chronic inflammation. The increased circulating and tissue proinflammatory cytokines in obesity may promote osteoclast activity and bone resorption through modifying the receptor activator of NF-κB (RANK)/RANK ligand/osteoprotegerin pathway. Furthermore, the excessive secretion of leptin and/or decreased production of adiponectin by adipocytes in obesity may either directly affect bone formation or indirectly affect bone resorption through up-regulated proinflammatory cytokine production. Finally, high-fat intake may interfere with intestinal calcium absorption and therefore decrease calcium availability for bone formation. Unraveling the relationship between fat and bone metabolism at molecular level may help us to develop therapeutic agents to prevent or treat both obesity and osteoporosis. Obesity, defined as having a body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2, is a condition in which excessive body fat accumulates to a degree that adversely affects health. The rates of obesity rates have doubled since 1980 and as of 2007, 33% of men and 35% of women in the US are obese. Obesity is positively associated to many chronic disorders such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, and certain cancers. It is estimated that the direct medical cost associated with obesity in the United States is ~$100 billion per year.Bone mass and strength decrease during adulthood, especially in women after menopause. These changes can culminate in osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration resulting in increased bone fracture risk. It is estimated that there are about 10 million Americans over the age of 50 who have osteoporosis while another 34 million people are at risk of developing the disease. In 2001, osteoporosis alone accounted for some $17 billion in direct annual healthcare expenditure. Several lines of evidence suggest that obesity and bone metabolism are interrelated. First, both osteoblasts (bone forming cells) and adipocytes (energy storing cells) are derived from a common mesenchymal stem cell and agents inhibiting adipogenesis stimulated osteoblast differentiation and vice versa, those inhibiting osteoblastogenesis increased adipogenesis. Second, decreased bone marrow osteoblastogenesis with aging is usually accompanied with increased marrow adipogenesis. Third, chronic use of steroid hormone, such as glucocorticoid, results in obesity accompanied by rapid bone loss. Fourth, both obesity and osteoporosis are associated with elevated oxidative stress and increased production of proinflammatory cytokines. At present, the mechanisms for the effects of obesity on bone metabolism are not well defined and will be the focus of this review.

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy in musculoskeletal disorders

Abstract: The sources of shockwave generation include electrohydraulic, electromagnetic and piezoelectric principles. Electrohydraulic shockwaves are high-energy acoustic waves generated under water explosion with high voltage electrode. Shockwave in urology (lithotripsy) is primarily used to disintegrate urolithiasis, whereas shockwave in orthopedics (orthotripsy) is not used to disintegrate tissues, rather to induce tissue repair and regeneration. The application of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in musculoskeletal disorders has been around for more than a decade and is primarily used in the treatment of sports related over-use tendinopathies such as proximal plantar fasciitis of the heel, lateral epicondylitis of the elbow, calcific or non-calcific tendonitis of the shoulder and patellar tendinopathy etc. The success rate ranged from 65% to 91%, and the complications were low and negligible. ESWT is also utilized in the treatment of non-union of long bone fracture, avascular necrosis of femoral head, chronic diabetic and non-diabetic ulcers and ischemic heart disease. The vast majority of the published papers showed positive and beneficial effects. FDA (USA) first approved ESWT for the treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis in 2000 and lateral epicondylitis in 2002. ESWT is a novel non-invasive therapeutic modality without surgery or surgical risks, and the clinical application of ESWT steadily increases over the years. This article reviews the current status of ESWT in musculoskeletal disorders.

Animal models of osteoarthritis: classification, update, and measurement of outcomes.

Abstract: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most commonly occurring forms of arthritis in the world today. It is a debilitating chronic illness causing pain and immense discomfort to the affected individual. Significant research is currently ongoing to understand its pathophysiology and develop successful treatment regimens based on this knowledge. Animal models have played a key role in achieving this goal. Animal models currently used to study osteoarthritis can be classified based on the etiology under investigation, primary osteoarthritis, and post-traumatic osteoarthritis, to better clarify the relationship between these models and the pathogenesis of the disease. Non-invasive animal models have shown significant promise in understanding early osteoarthritic changes. Imaging modalities play a pivotal role in understanding the pathogenesis of OA and the correlation with pain. These imaging studies would also allow in vivo surveillance of the disease as a function of time in the animal model. This review summarizes the current understanding of the disease pathogenesis, invasive and non-invasive animal models, imaging modalities, and pain assessment techniques in the animals.

Determining the clinical importance of treatment benefits for interventions for painful orthopedic conditions

Abstract: The overarching goals of treatments for orthopedic conditions are generally to improve or restore function and alleviate pain. Results of clinical trials are generally used to determine whether a treatment is efficacious; however, a statistically significant improvement may not actually be clinically important, i.e., meaningful to the patient. To determine whether an intervention has produced clinically important benefits requires a two-step process: first, determining the magnitude of change considered clinically important for a particular measure in the relevant population and, second, applying this yardstick to a patient’s data to determine whether s/he has benefited from treatment. Several metrics have been devised to quantify clinically important differences, including the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and clinically important difference (CID). Herein, we review the methods to generate the MCID and other metrics and their use and interpretation in clinical trials and practice. We particularly highlight the many pitfalls associated with the generation and utilization of these metrics that can impair their correct use. These pitfalls include the fact that different pain measures yield different MCIDs, that efficacy in clinical trials is impacted by various factors (population characteristics, trial design), that the MCID value is impacted by the method used to calculate it (anchor, distribution), by the type of anchor chosen and by the definition (threshold) of improvement. The MCID is also dependent on the population characteristics such as disease type and severity, sex, age, etc. For appropriate use, the MCID should be applied to changes in individual subjects, not to group changes. The MCID and CID are useful tools to define general guidelines to determine whether a treatment produces clinically meaningful effects. However, the many pitfalls associated with these metrics require a detailed understanding of the methods to calculate them and their context of use. Orthopedic surgeons that will use these metrics need to carefully understand them and be aware of their pitfalls.