Next Article in Journal
Perfusable Tissue Bioprinted into a 3D-Printed Tailored Bioreactor System
Previous Article in Journal
Bi-Exponential 3D UTE-T1ρ Relaxation Mapping of Ex Vivo Human Knee Patellar Tendon at 3T
Previous Article in Special Issue
Focused Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound (FLIPUS) Mitigates Apoptosis of MLO-Y4 Osteocyte-like Cells
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Advances in Fracture Healing Research

Department of Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, Eberhard-Karls-University Tuebingen, BG Unfallklinik, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Bioengineering 2024, 11(1), 67; https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11010067
Submission received: 11 May 2023 / Accepted: 20 December 2023 / Published: 9 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Fracture Healing Research)
Despite a constant refinement of surgical techniques and bone fixation methods, up to 15% of fractures result in impaired healing or even develop a non-union. The resulting immobility during convalescence strongly affects patients’ lives. In the past decades, many risk factors for delayed bone healing have been identified; however, the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood, and the online monitoring of fracture healing is a great challenge. Therefore, this current Special Issue focused on recent advances in fracture healing research. This Special Issue comprises 13 original articles and 2 reviews covering a wide range of topics related to fracture healing.
Both review articles give a broad overview of the basic and clinical aspects of fracture healing. One of the review articles provides a general overview of the recent advances in animal models for studying bone fracture healing [1]. This review is complemented by an in vivo study describing a new model which combines surgical and pharmacological intervention to induce metaphyseal non-union in osteoporotic rats [2].
The second review systematically analyzed risk factors for pathological fracture healing and non-unions, providing the clinical background for the topic [3]. Two of the in vivo studies more closely investigated age as a risk factor for delayed fracture healing. While one study well-characterized age-dependent differences in callus formation and mineralization, which result in reduced mechanical strength following fracture healing [4], the second study additionally addressed the role of severe blood loss as an additional risk factor for impaired fracture healing [5]. One tool to investigate associated wound healing is given by another article describing a novel in vitro model simulating a scab [6]. An option for intervention is given by the ex vivo study in this Special Issue, which describes a novel periosteal-derived membrane with osteoinductive properties, addressing cell therapeutic strategies in fracture healing [7].
The use of growth factors or cytokines as therapeutics in fracture healing was also addressed. Bone morphogenetic protein 2 was used to re-activate bone remodeling in mice with the long-term and high-dose treatment of zoledronic acid [8].
Another aspect covers the mechanical stimulation of fracture healing, starting in vitro with a study showing anti-apoptotic effects of Focused Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound (FLIPUS) on osteocytic cells, which opens up new perspectives as a non-invasive adjunct therapy promoting bone regeneration and repair [9]. These findings are complemented by an in vivo study showing positive effects of electric stimulation on critical size defects in rat calvaria filled with HA/TCP composite scaffolds [10].
Other studies focused more on the development, generation, and characterization of novel bone material to fill such large-size defects. For example, the porous ortho- and pyrophosphate-containing glass microspheres prepared by a sol–gel method provide very good physical characteristics not only for cell attachment and proliferation but also as a drug delivery system [11]. These glass microspheres can also be incorporated in 3D-printed matrices, e.g., from thermoplastic collagen, as described in another in vitro study in this Special Issue [12]. While this article provides valuable protocols to generate 3D-printed matrices from thermoplastic collagen, another study describing two novel bone adhesives focused more on characterizing their bond strength and adhesion mechanisms, which differ between natural and synthetic polymer adhesives [13].
Furthermore, other studies provide novel techniques to analyze fracture healing in vivo, e.g., multicolor histochemical staining for the identification of mineralized and non-mineralized musculoskeletal tissue in decalcified bone samples [14], or finite element model simulating three-point-bending tests in mouse tibiae [15]. The development of such techniques helps to apply the 3Rs principle (reduce, replace, refine) in in vivo studies.
Overall, this Special Issue provides a comprehensive overview of the latest advances in fracture healing research, highlighting the potential for new and innovative approaches to improve bone healing outcomes.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gao, H.; Huang, J.; Wei, Q.; He, C. Advances in Animal Models for Studying Bone Fracture Healing. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Deluca, A.; Wagner, A.; Faustini, B.; Weissenbacher, N.; Deininger, C.; Wichlas, F.; Tempfer, H.; Mueller, E.J.; Traweger, A. Development of a Metaphyseal Non-Union Model in the Osteoporotic Rat Femur. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Saul, D.; Menger, M.M.; Ehnert, S.; Nüssler, A.K.; Histing, T.; Laschke, M.W. Bone Healing Gone Wrong: Pathological Fracture Healing and Non-Unions—Overview of Basic and Clinical Aspects and Systematic Review of Risk Factors. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Menger, M.M.; Manuschewski, R.; Ehnert, S.; Rollmann, M.F.; Maisenbacher, T.C.; Tobias, A.L.; Menger, M.D.; Laschke, M.W.; Histing, T. Radiographic, Biomechanical and Histological Characterization of Femoral Fracture Healing in Aged CD-1 Mice. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Bundkirchen, K.; Ye, W.; Nowak, A.J.; Lienenklaus, S.; Welke, B.; Relja, B.; Neunaber, C. Fracture Healing in Elderly Mice and the Effect of an Additional Severe Blood Loss: A Radiographic and Biomechanical Murine Study. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Liu, C.; Rinderknecht, H.; Histing, T.; Kolbenschlag, J.; Nussler, A.K.; Ehnert, S. Establishment of an In Vitro Scab Model for Investigating Different Phases of Wound Healing. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Manon, J.; Evrard, R.; Fievé, L.; Bouzin, C.; Magnin, D.; Xhema, D.; Darius, T.; Bonaccorsi-Riani, E.; Gianello, P.; Docquier, P.-L.; et al. A New Osteogenic Membrane to Enhance Bone Healing: At the Crossroads between the Periosteum, the Induced Membrane, and the Diamond Concept. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Moon, Y.J.; Jeong, S.; Lee, K.-B. Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2 Promotes Bone Formation in Bone Defects in Which Bone Remodeling Is Suppressed by Long-Term and High-Dose Zoledronic Acid. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Puts, R.; Khaffaf, A.; Shaka, M.; Zhang, H.; Raum, K. Focused Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound (FLIPUS) Mitigates Apoptosis of MLO-Y4 Osteocyte-like Cells. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Helaehil, J.V.; Helaehil, L.V.; Alves, L.F.; Huang, B.; Santamaria-Jr, M.; Bartolo, P.; Caetano, G.F. Electrical Stimulation Therapy and HA/TCP Composite Scaffolds Modulate the Wnt Pathways in Bone Regeneration of Critical-Sized Defects. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Milborne, B.; Murrell, L.; Cardillo-Zallo, I.; Titman, J.; Briggs, L.; Scotchford, C.; Thompson, A.; Layfield, R.; Ahmed, I. Developing Porous Ortho- and Pyrophosphate-Containing Glass Microspheres; Structural and Cytocompatibility Characterisation. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Passos, M.; Zankovic, S.; Minas, G.; Klüver, E.; Baltzer, M.; Schmal, H.; Seidenstuecker, M. About 3D Printability of Thermoplastic Collagen for Biomedical Applications. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Upson, S.J.; Benning, M.J.; Fulton, D.A.; Corbett, I.P.; Dalgarno, K.W.; German, M.J. Bond Strength and Adhesion Mechanisms of Novel Bone Adhesives. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Sun, Y.; Helmholz, H.; Willumeit-Römer, R. Multicolor Histochemical Staining for Identification of Mineralized and Non-Mineralized Musculoskeletal Tissue: Immunohistochemical and Radiological Validation in Decalcified Bone Samples. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Huang, X.; Nussler, A.K.; Reumann, M.K.; Augat, P.; Menger, M.M.; Ghallab, A.; Hengstler, J.G.; Histing, T.; Ehnert, S. Contribution to the 3R Principle: Description of a Specimen-Specific Finite Element Model Simulating 3-Point-Bending Tests in Mouse Tibiae. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ehnert, S.; Histing, T. Advances in Fracture Healing Research. Bioengineering 2024, 11, 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11010067

AMA Style

Ehnert S, Histing T. Advances in Fracture Healing Research. Bioengineering. 2024; 11(1):67. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11010067

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ehnert, Sabrina, and Tina Histing. 2024. "Advances in Fracture Healing Research" Bioengineering 11, no. 1: 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11010067

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop