Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar;15(3):877-924.
doi: 10.1038/s41596-019-0271-2. Epub 2020 Feb 14.

A preclinical large-animal model for the assessment of critical-size load-bearing bone defect reconstruction

Affiliations

A preclinical large-animal model for the assessment of critical-size load-bearing bone defect reconstruction

David S Sparks et al. Nat Protoc. 2020 Mar.

Abstract

Critical-size bone defects, which require large-volume tissue reconstruction, remain a clinical challenge. Bone engineering has the potential to provide new treatment concepts, yet clinical translation requires anatomically and physiologically relevant preclinical models. The ovine critical-size long-bone defect model has been validated in numerous studies as a preclinical tool for evaluating both conventional and novel bone-engineering concepts. With sufficient training and experience in large-animal studies, it is a technically feasible procedure with a high level of reproducibility when appropriate preoperative and postoperative management protocols are followed. The model can be established by following a procedure that includes the following stages: (i) preoperative planning and preparation, (ii) the surgical approach, (iii) postoperative management, and (iv) postmortem analysis. Using this model, full results for peer-reviewed publication can be attained within 2 years. In this protocol, we comprehensively describe how to establish proficiency using the preclinical model for the evaluation of a range of bone defect reconstruction options.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Henkel, J. et al. Bone regeneration based on tissue engineering conceptions – a 21st century perspective. Bone Res. 1, 216–248 (2013). - PubMed - PMC
    1. Weiss, R. J. et al. Decreasing incidence of tibial shaft fractures between 1998 and 2004: information based on 10,627 Swedish inpatients. Acta Orthop. 79, 526–533 (2008). - PubMed
    1. Wagels, M., Rowe, D., Senewiratne, S., Read, T. & Theile, D. R. Soft tissue reconstruction after compound tibial fracture: 235 cases over 12 years. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthet. Surg. 68, 1276–1285 (2015). - PubMed
    1. Wagels, M., Rowe, D., Senewiratne, S. & Theile, D. R. History of lower limb reconstruction after trauma. ANZ J. Surg. 83, 348–353 (2013). - PubMed
    1. Sparks, D. S. et al. Vascularised bone transfer: history, blood supply and contemporary problems. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthet. Surg. 70, 1–11 (2017). - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources