About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
International Journal of Biomaterials

Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 134521, 11 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/134521
Research Article

Controlled Release of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Enhances Osteoconductive and Biodegradable Properties of Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate in a Rat Calvarial Defect Model

1Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-8638, Japan

2Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Otaru Kyokai Hospital, Suminoe-1-6-15, Otaru, Hokkaido 047-8510, Japan

3Department of Biomaterials, Field of Tissue Engineering, Institute for Frontier Medical Sciences, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan

Received 13 August 2013; Revised 27 November 2013; Accepted 27 November 2013; Published 14 April 2014

Academic Editor: Traian V. Chirila

Copyright © 2014 Tomohiro Minagawa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Autologous bone grafts remain the gold standard for the treatment of congenital craniofacial disorders; however, there are potential problems including donor site morbidity and limitations to the amount of bone that can be harvested. Recent studies suggest that granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) promotes fracture healing or osteogenesis. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether topically applied G-CSF can stimulate the osteoconductive properties of beta-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) in a rat calvarial defect model. A total of 27 calvarial defects 5 mm in diameter were randomly divided into nine groups, which were treated with various combinations of a β-TCP disc and G-CSF in solution form or controlled release system using gelatin hydrogel. Histologic and histomorphometric analyses were performed at eight weeks postoperatively. The controlled release of low-dose (1 μg and 5 μg) G-CSF significantly enhanced new bone formation when combined with a β-TCP disc. Moreover, administration of 5 μg G-CSF using a controlled release system significantly promoted the biodegradable properties of β-TCP. In conclusion, the controlled release of 5 μg G-CSF significantly enhanced the osteoconductive and biodegradable properties of β-TCP. The combination of G-CSF slow-release and β-TCP is a novel and promising approach for treating pediatric craniofacial bone defects.

1. Introduction

Autologous bone grafts remain the gold standard for the treatment of congenital craniofacial bone disorders, such as alveolar cleft [18]. However, autologous bone grafts have potential problems, which include donor site morbidity and limitations to the amount of bone that can be harvested [913]. Porous beta-tricalcium phosphate ( -TCP), which is now commercially available, is known for its osteoconductive and biodegradable properties. However, its use as a replacement for autologous bone grafts remains controversial [1418].

According to recent studies, various growth factors exhibit osteogenic properties [8, 1923], such as bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) [2436], basic fibroblast growth factor (b-FGF) [3742], platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) [4346], transforming growth factor-beta 1 (TGF- 1) [4750], and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) [5154]. In general, growth factors administered in solution form are readily diffused or degraded in vivo [26, 50, 55, 56]. Thus, their enhanced and prolonged bioactivity at the target site is necessary to reduce bolus dosage, especially in pediatric patients. In addition, growth factors must be administered in combination with carrier materials.

Recent studies suggest that granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) promotes fracture healing or osteogenesis [5760]. Because G-CSF is an essential drug most frequently used to treat neutropenia secondary to chemotherapy, it is widely administered not only to adults but also to pediatric patients [6169]. Accordingly, its biosafety is well established through extensive use in clinical contexts compared to other growth factors.

Commercially available -TCP (Superpore, PENTAX, Tokyo, Japan) was used in the present study as an osteoconductive scaffold and space-maintaining material. To investigate the bone regenerative properties of G-CSF, topical supplementation either in solution or in sustained release form with a gelatin hydrogel system was performed. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether G-CSF with or without a controlled release system stimulates bone regeneration in combination with -TCP using a rat calvarial defect model [7073].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Ethics

The present study was approved by the institutional committee of animal experiments at Hokkaido University (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Protocol number 12-0017). Fourteen Wistar rats (male, 13 weeks old; weight, 250–350 g) were purchased from Sankyo Labo Service Corporation (Tokyo, Japan). A total of 27 calvarial defects were randomly divided into nine treatment groups, with a total of three defects per treatment group. In solution-based treatment groups, defects were filled with a -TCP disc containing normal saline alone (group A, control) or 1 (group B), 5 (group C), or 20  g of G-CSF (group D). In controlled release groups, defects were filled with a -TCP disk with an overlaid gelatin hydrogel sheet incorporating normal saline alone (group E) or, 1 (group F), 5 (group G), or 20  g G-CSF (group H). The remaining defects were left empty to measure spontaneous healing (group I) (Table 1).

tab1
Table 1: List of the experimental groups.
2.2. Preparation of β-TCP and Gelatin Hydrogel Incorporating G-CSF

Commercially available porous -TCP blocks (Superpore) were kindly supplied by PENTAX (Tokyo, Japan). Blocks were cut into discs 5 mm in diameter and 1 mm thick using a fine surgical saw and round bur.

Gelatin hydrogels were prepared by glutaraldehyde crosslinking of acidic gelatin as previously described [37]. Briefly, a mixed acidic gelatin-glutaraldehyde aqueous solution was cast into a polypropylene dish (  mm2) and maintained at 4°C for 12 hours. Hydrogel sheets were placed in a 100 mM glycine aqueous solution at 37°C. Discs were freeze-dried and sterilized with ethylene oxide gas. The water content of gelatin hydrogels (weight ratio of water present in hydrogel to wet hydrogel) was 95 wt%. Gelatin hydrogels were designed so that degradation would be complete in approximately two weeks under in vivo conditions [29, 39, 49, 74].

Hydrogel sheets were cut into discs 5 mm in diameter and 1 mm thick. Human recombinant G-CSF was kindly supplied by KYOWA KIRIN Co. (Tokyo, Japan). To prepare gelatin hydrogels incorporating G-CSF, 20  L of normal saline solution containing 1, 5, or 20  g G-CSF was dropped onto freeze-dried hydrogel discs and left at 4°C overnight. Similarly, 20  L of G-CSF-free normal saline was dropped onto a freeze-dried hydrogel to obtain G-CSF empty hydrogels.

2.3. Surgical Procedures

Animals were anesthetized by intraperitoneal administration of pentobarbital sodium (50 mg/kg). Surgical areas were shaved and disinfected with povidone-iodine. Subsequently, a skin incision was made and subperiosteal dissection was performed under a surgical microscope to raise the periosteal flaps. A bone defect 5 mm in diameter was then prepared on each side lateral to the sagittal suture using a fine surgical bur under copious sterile saline irrigation. Defects were filled with bone substitutes according to the groups described above (Table 1 and Figure 1). Periosteal flaps were repositioned using a 4-0 nylon suture, and the skin was closed with a running 4-0 nylon suture. Finally, animals were euthanized by anesthetic overdose eight weeks after surgery.

fig1
Figure 1: Surgical images. (a) Intraoperative view of rat calvaria. Two 5 mm diameter calvarial defects were created on each side of the sagittal suture (arrow heads). The defects were filled with a beta-tricalcium phosphate disc (B) or left untreated with exposed dura (D). (b) Schematic of a cross section of the calvarial defect. The dotted square in -TCP indicates the most-central area where histomorphometric analysis was conducted.
2.4. Histological Processing

Specimens were prepared for decalcified sectioning by immersing them in 10% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) for four weeks. Decalcified specimens were dehydrated in ascending grades of ethanol and embedded in paraffin wax. Embedded samples were then sectioned into 3  m slices parallel to the sagittal suture across the center of each calvarial defect using a microtome (LEICA, SM2000R). Hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining was used for histological analysis and aniline blue staining was used for histomorphometric analysis.

2.5. Histologic and Histomorphometric Analysis

Each specimen was examined under a light microscope and digital photographs were obtained for histological evaluation of a region corresponding to the center of the calvarial defect (Figure 1(b)). Images of HE staining were used for conventional histological analysis. High magnification images with aniline blue staining (1.001 mm2 or pixels) of the most-central area of the defect were quantified to measure the percentage of newly formed bone and remaining bioceramics using imaging software (Adobe Photoshop CS5) [75]. All histomorphometric evaluations were conducted by a researcher blinded to the groupings.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Data between groups were further analyzed using a Tukey-Kramer multiple comparisons test. was considered statistically significant. Experimental results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

3. Results

3.1. Histological Findings

Figure 2 shows low magnification images of decalcified specimens stained with HE along the midline of each calvarial defect. No remaining gelatin hydrogel or surgical site infections were observed. In group A (control group), newly formed trabecular bone was observed focally but failed to occupy the entire defect. In groups B–D (solution-based treatment groups) and in group E (G-CSF-free gelatin hydrogel group), newly formed trabecular bone was observable but failed to fill the defect. In group F (1  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel group), newly formed bone tissue nearly bridged the calvarial gap, whereas residual -TCP was also present. In group G (5  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel group), most of the defect was occupied with newly formed bone tissue; moreover, sparse residual -TCP was observed. In contrast, group H (20  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel group) showed focal formation of new bone surrounded by fibrous connective tissue at the superficial area of the defect with the presence of remaining biomaterials. In group I (untreated defect group), the defect was filled with fibrous connective tissue with hardly any newly formed bone. Figure 3 shows higher magnification images of groups E (E′) and G (G′). In group G, newly formed bone was observed immediately below the periosteal flap and multinuclear giant cells were detected around the newly formed bone. In contrast, in group E, the formation of fibrous tissue and blood vessels was significant compared with newly formed bone in the subperiosteal region.

134521.fig.002
Figure 2: Low magnification images of hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining. (a) -TCP alone; (b) 1  g G-CSF in solution form; (c) 5  g G-CSF in solution form; (d) 20  g G-CSF in solution form; (e) free gelatin hydrogel; (f) 1  g G-CSF with gelatin hydrogel; (g) 5  g G-CSF with gelatin hydrogel; (h) 20  g G-CSF with gelatin hydrogel; and (i) untreated defect. Note the dense fibrous tissue surrounding focal bone formation in group H (arrow heads). Original magnification 40x; scale bar = 500  m. NB: newly formed bone; remaining -TCP.
fig3
Figure 3: High magnification images of hematoxylin and eosin staining (E′) group E and (G′) group G. Note the obvious fibrous tissue and vessel formation in group E. In group G, newly formed bone is observed immediately below the periosteal layer and multinuclear giant cells are present. Original magnification 200x; scale bar = 50  m. G: multinuclear giant cell; NB: newly formed bone; : periosteal flap; remaining -TCP.
3.2. Histomorphometric Evaluation

Figure 4 shows high magnification images of aniline blue staining in which matured bone tissue exhibits homogeneous dark blue and entrapped osteocytes. Residual -TCP was observed as homogeneous white particles. Figure 5 shows the percentage of newly formed bone and remaining -TCP per high-powered field. In groups A, B, C, D, E, and H, defects had a tendency to be occupied by more remaining -TCP compared to newly formed bone tissue. In group A (control), the percentages of newly formed bone and remaining -TCP were and , respectively. In contrast, in groups F and G (1  g and 5  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel groups), the percentage of newly formed bone ( and for groups F and G, resp.) conspicuously exceeded values of remaining -TCP ( and for groups F and G, resp.).

134521.fig.004
Figure 4: High magnification images of aniline blue staining. Capital letters A–I correspond to the treatment groups. Newly formed bone (NB) appears as a homogenous dark blue area, which includes osteocytes. The remaining -TCP shows a homogenous white area (asterisk). Bony bridging was nearly complete in groups F and G. Less residual -TCP was seen in group G. Original magnification 100x; scale bar = 200  m.
134521.fig.005
Figure 5: Percentage of newly formed bone and remaining -TCP eight weeks after surgery. Values are shown as mean. Capital letters A–I correspond to treatment groups. Note that newly formed bone occupies more than 50% of the central area of the defect in groups F and G. In addition, the percentage of newly formed bone exceeds that of remaining -TCP.

Figure 6 shows the percentage of newly formed bone after statistical analysis. The values were significantly higher in groups F and G compared to the control group ( ). There was no significant difference between groups A (control) and I (empty defect). Values corresponding to groups B, C, D, E, and H showed no significant difference compared to that of group A.

134521.fig.006
Figure 6: Percentage of newly formed bone in the high magnification field. Values are shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD, ). The values are significantly higher in groups F and G (1 and 5  g G-CSF with gelatin hydrogel, resp.) compared to group A ( -TCP alone).

Figure 7 shows the percentage of remaining -TCP, which was used to evaluate biodegradability in vivo. There was no significant difference between groups A, B, C, D, E, F, and H. In contrast, only in group G (5  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel group) the percentage was significantly lower compared to group A ( versus , ). This result indicated a prominent enhancement of the biodegradable properties of -TCP, which was further accelerated by 5  g G-CSF in sustained release form.

134521.fig.007
Figure 7: Percentage of remaining -TCP in the high magnification field. Values are shown as mean ± SD ( ). The percentage in group G (5  g G-CSF with gelatin hydrogel) is significantly lower compared to group A. This result highlights the biodegradable properties of -TCP.

4. Discussion

In the present study, we demonstrated that the controlled release of low-dose (1  g and 5  g) G-CSF significantly enhanced bone regeneration when combined with a -TCP disc. Moreover, administration of 5  g G-CSF using a controlled release system significantly promoted the biodegradable properties of -TCP. According to our results, this tissue-engineering approach combining -TCP and the sustained release of G-CSF is potentially feasible and promising for clinical use. To our knowledge, this is the first report which demonstrates the bone regeneration properties of G-CSF at membranous ossification sites. Because systemic administration of 5–10  g G-CSF/kg/day is commonly used for pediatric malignancies [64, 6668], the results shown here indicate that notably low doses of G-CSF (1–5  g/defect/2 weeks) with controlled release can promote osteogenesis.

In this study, we used -TCP as an osteoconductive scaffold and space-maintaining material [76]. In the present study, the left untreated defect group showed thin connective tissue formation with minimal bone regeneration. Although the control group ( -TCP alone) showed a greater tendency for bone formation compared to the untreated defect group, there were no significant differences between the groups. Furthermore, the defect in the control group had more residual -TCP than newly formed bone tissue. These results suggest that -TCP alone implantation is not sufficient to fill the defect with regenerated bone in the craniofacial region. Some experimental studies have confirmed the osteoconductive properties of -TCP, which were comparable to autologous bone grafts [15, 17, 70]. However, other groups have emphasized versatility by combining -TCP with autologous bone fragments [16, 7779], growth factors [45, 46, 8084], simvastatin [71], or stem cells [18, 85, 86] in both experimental and clinical studies.

Interestingly, Ishida et al. reported that topical application of G-CSF had bone regenerative properties via neovascularization and osteogenesis [59]. That study revealed a significant increase in CD34+ cells—an endothelial and hematopoietic progenitor-enriched cell population—in capillaries corresponding to the bone defect site. These findings suggested that CD34+ cells were important promoters of neovascularization. The study also showed that G-CSF was responsible for mobilizing osteoblasts to the bone defect site. In addition, recent studies demonstrated the promotion of fracture healing by CD34+ cells [58, 8789]. Kuroda et al. reported the first successful clinical case of a tibial nonunion treated with topically applied G-CSF-mobilized CD34+ cells [60]. Some reports have shown that CD34+ cells play an important role in releasing angiogenic factors, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), and fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) [58, 90, 91]. Moreover, the differentiation capacity of CD34+ cells into osteoblasts has been shown in previous reports [59, 92]. In the present study, the controlled release G-CSF groups showed more newly formed bone immediately below the periosteum compared to the other groups. On the other hand, Rojbani et al. reported that osteoprogenitor cells differentiate from the dura mater [71]. Presumably, the sustained release of G-CSF may stimulate periosteal cells along an osteogenic lineage, resulting in enhanced bone formation.

In the present study, we used gelatin hydrogel as a sustained release carrier of G-CSF. Various growth factors have been shown to have bone regenerative properties, such as bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) [2436], b-FGF [3742, 93], PDGF [4346], TGF- 1 [4750], and VEGF [5154]. BMP-2 has the strongest osteoinductive activity in promoting ectopic bone regeneration [26, 29] and has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in orthopedics and oral surgery [30, 34, 35]. In general, growth factors administered in solution form are easily diffused or degraded prior to achieving full bioactivity [26, 50, 55, 56]. Therefore, commercially available BMP-2 in combination with a collagen sponge kit must contain milligram amounts of the growth factor (1.5 mg/mL) [30, 34, 35]. Potential risk for local inflammatory responses should be taken into consideration after topical application [35]. In order to reduce bolus dosage, enhanced and prolonged bioactivity of growth factors at the targeting site is necessary. One of the practical ways to control the in vivo release of growth factors is to use gelatin hydrogel, in which the growth factor is physicochemically immobilized and subsequently released in proportion to hydrogel degradation [74, 94]. In the present study, the water content of gelatin hydrogels (weight ratio of water present in hydrogel to wet hydrogel) was 95 wt%. The hydrogels were designed so that degradation would be complete in approximately 2 weeks under in vivo conditions [29, 39, 49, 50, 74]. Gelatin is commercially available and its biosafety is well established through its long clinical use as a plasma expander and drug ingredient.

In the present study, the controlled release of 5  g G-CSF (group G) significantly promoted the osteoconductive properties and biodegradability of -TCP. Improved biodegradability compared to hydroxyapatite is a major characteristic of porous -TCP [71, 9597]. Biodegradability is generally thought to occur in harmony with bone remodeling, in which -TCP allows tissue fluid dissolution and absorption by osteoclasts in vivo [72, 95]. Brouard et al. reported that G-CSF increased both osteoclast activity and bone resorption in the bone marrow, triggering an increase in the number of mesenchymal precursor cells in the bone marrow using a mouse model [98]. In another study, PDGF modified -TCP resorption, although the underlying mechanism was not provided [46]. Some studies have shown that BMP-2 does not facilitate -TCP resorption [70, 99]. In group G of the present study, multinuclear giant cells were observed around newly formed bone immediately below the periosteum. We can speculate from the results that the controlled release of 5  g G-CSF may stimulate the mobilization and differentiation of mesenchymal precursor cells in the periosteum as well as osteoclast activation. In contrast, group H (20  g G-CSF gelatin hydrogel group) showed less new bone formation and -TCP resorption. This might be explained by the multidifferentiation potential of G-CSF-mobilized progenitor cells, which is consistent with previously published reports [92, 100102]. Interestingly, Ishida et al. stated that topical application of 50  g G-CSF did not induce bone regeneration according to preliminary data [59]. Moreover, some reports have shown that sustained release of G-CSF enhances tendon-bone integration with significantly more formation of Sharpey’s fibers and microvessels [103]. These results led us to speculate that a prolonged high concentration of topical G-CSF drives progenitor cells toward fibrous tissue formation rather than osteogenesis. Therefore, sustaining relatively low concentrations of topical G-CSF can play an important role in inducing balanced bone regeneration and -TCP resorption. Our findings suggest an optimal dose of 5  g per defect for controlled release of G-CSF, which is consistent with previously published reports [59, 103].

There are several limitations in this study that must be noted. First, the study was designed using small animals and a limited number per experimental group. Second, although some reports accept the calvarial defect rat model [7073], the decortication procedure may not fully reflect clinical situations of congenital craniofacial anomalies [104], since some evidence suggests that fractures mobilize CD34+ cells from the bone marrow into the peripheral blood [88, 89]. Third, we used histomorphometric analysis to characterize newly formed bone and biodegradation of -TCP; however, we did not identify CD34+ cells or evaluate the activity of osteogenic cells at the bone defect site. Future studies should incorporate experimental models without decortication, larger animals, and immunohistochemical analysis.

In conclusion, controlled release of 5  g G-CSF using a gelatin hydrogel system significantly enhances the osteoconductive and biodegradable properties of porous -TCP. The present results indicate that the combination of G-CSF slow-release and -TCP is feasible and promising for the treatment of congenital craniofacial bone defects.

Conflict of Interests

All authors declared that there is no conflict of interests to report regarding this work.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Makoto Matsui at Kyoto University for his technical assistance with the drug delivery system. They also thank Dr. Takehiro Warabi for his excellent support in animal experiments. This study was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research (no. 11014643) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

References

  1. P. J. Boyne, “Use of marrow cancellous bone grafts in maxillary alveolar and palatal clefts,” Journal of Dental Research, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 821–824, 1974. View at Scopus
  2. F. E. Abyholm, O. Bergland, and G. Semb, “Secondary bone grafting of alveolar clefts. A surgical/orthodontic treatment enabling a non-prosthodontic rehabilitation in cleft lip and palate patients,” Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 127–140, 1981. View at Scopus
  3. I. T. Jackson, L. R. Scheker, J. G. Vandervord, and J. G. McLennan, “Bone marrow grafting in the secondary closure of alveolar-palatal defects in children,” British Journal of Plastic Surgery, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 422–425, 1981. View at Scopus
  4. H. Enemark, S. Sindet-Pedersen, and M. Bundgaard, “Long-term results after secondary bone grafting of alveolar clefts,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 45, no. 11, pp. 913–918, 1987. View at Scopus
  5. M. Cohen, J. W. Polley, and A. A. Figueroa, “Secondary (intermediate) alveolar bone grafting,” Clinics in Plastic Surgery, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 691–705, 1993. View at Scopus
  6. D. LaRossa, S. Buchman, D. M. Rothkopf, R. Mayro, P. Randall, and S. A. Wolfe, “A comparison of iliac and cranial bone in secondary grafting of alveolar clefts,” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 789–799, 1995. View at Scopus
  7. A. K. Bajaj, A. A. Wongworawat, and A. Punjabi, “Management of alveolar clefts,” The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 840–846, 2003. View at Scopus
  8. W. M. M. T. van Hout, A. B. M. van der Molen, C. C. Breugem, R. Koole, and E. M. van Cann, “Reconstruction of the alveolar cleft: can growth factor-aided tissue engineering replace autologous bone grafting? A literature review and systematic review of results obtained with bone morphogenetic protein-2,” Clinical Oral Investigations, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 297–303, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. A. M. Sadove, C. L. Nelson, B. L. Eppley, and B. Nguyen, “An evaluation of calvarial and iliac donor sites in alveolar cleft grafting,” Cleft Palate Journal, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 225–228, 1990. View at Scopus
  10. K. H. Dawson, M. A. Egbert, and R. W. T. Myall, “Pain following iliac crest bone grafting of alveolar clefts,” Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 151–154, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. C. Swan and T. E. E. Goodacre, “Morbidity at the iliac crest donor site following bone grafting of the cleft alveolus,” British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 129–133, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. M. A. Rawashdeh and H. Telfah, “Secondary alveolar bone grafting: the dilemma of donor site selection and morbidity,” British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 665–670, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. Z. H. Baqain, M. Anabtawi, A. A. Karaky, and Z. Malkawi, “Morbidity from anterior Iliac crest bone harvesting for secondary alveolar bone grafting: an outcome assessment study,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 570–575, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. G. Szabó, L. Huys, P. Coulthard et al., “A prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial of autogenous bone versus β-tricalcium phosphate graft alone for bilateral sinus elevation: histologic and histomorphometric evaluation,” International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 371–381, 2005. View at Scopus
  15. S. A. Zijderveld, I. R. Zerbo, J. P. A. van den Bergh, E. A. J. M. Schulten, and C. M. Ten Bruggenkate, “Maxillary sinus floor augmentation using a β-tricalcium phosphate (Cerasorb) alone compared to autogenous bone grafts,” International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 432–440, 2005. View at Scopus
  16. L.-Y. Dai and L.-S. Jiang, “Single-level instrumented posterolateral fusion of lumbar spine with β-tricalcium phosphate versus autograft: a prospective, randomized study with 3-year follow-up,” Spine, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 1299–1304, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. A. de Ruiter, G. Meijer, T. Dormaar et al., “β-TCP versus autologous bone for repair of alveolar clefts in a goat model,” Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 654–662, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. D. Zhang, F. Chu, Y. Yang et al., “Orthodontic tooth movement in alveolar cleft repaired with a tissue engineering bone: an experimental study in dogs,” Tissue Engineering A, vol. 17, no. 9-10, pp. 1313–1325, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. A. Jadlowiec, A. B. Celil, and J. O. Hollinger, “Bone tissue engineering: recent advances and promising therapeutic agents,” Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 409–423, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. A. J. Salgado, O. P. Coutinho, and R. L. Reis, “Bone tissue engineering: state of the art and future trends,” Macromolecular Bioscience, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 743–765, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. L. Moreau, J. F. Caccamese, D. P. Coletti, J. J. Sauk, and J. P. Fisher, “Tissue engineering solutions for cleft palates,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 2503–2511, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. P. Alvarez, C. K. Hee, L. Solchaga et al., “Growth factors and craniofacial surgery,” Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 20–29, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. B. Behr, M. Sorkin, M. Lehnhardt, A. Renda, M. T. Longaker, and N. Quarto, “A comparative analysis of the osteogenic effects of BMP-2, FGF-2, and VEGFA in a calvarial defect model,” Tissue Engineering A, vol. 18, no. 9-10, pp. 1079–1086, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. M. Mayer, J. Hollinger, E. Ron, and J. Wozney, “Maxillary alveolar cleft repair in dogs using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and a polymer carrier,” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 247–259, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. L. Hong, Y. Tabata, M. Yamamoto et al., “Comparison of bone regeneration in a rabbit skull defect by recombinant human BMP-2 incorporated in biodegradable hydrogel and in solution,” Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 1001–1014, 1998. View at Scopus
  26. M. Yamamoto, Y. Tabata, and Y. Ikada, “Ectopic bone formation induced by biodegradable hydrogels incorporating bone morphogenetic protein,” Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 439–458, 1998. View at Scopus
  27. T. Higuchi, A. Kinoshita, K. Takahashi, S. Oda, and I. Ishikawa, “Bone regeneration by recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in rat mandibular defects. An experimental model of defect filling,” Journal of Periodontology, vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 1026–1031, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. P. J. Boyne, “Application of bone morphogenetic proteins in the treatment of clinical oral and maxillofacial osseous defects,” The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery A, vol. 83, supplement 1, pp. S146–S150, 2001. View at Scopus
  29. M. Yamamoto, Y. Takahashi, and Y. Tabata, “Controlled release by biodegradable hydrogels enhances the ectopic bone formation of bone morphogenetic protein,” Biomaterials, vol. 24, no. 24, pp. 4375–4383, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. M. Chin, T. Ng, W. K. Tom, and M. Carstens, “Repair of alveolar clefts with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2) in patients with clefts,” Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 778–789, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. Yamamoto, Y. Takahashi, and Y. Tabata, “Enhanced bone regeneration at a segmental bone defect by controlled release of bone morphogenetic protein-2 from a biodegradable hydrogel,” Tissue Engineering, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1305–1311, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. A. S. Herford, P. J. Boyne, R. Rawson, and R. P. Williams, “Bone morphogenetic protein-induced repair of the premaxillary cleft,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 2136–2141, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. A. S. Herford, P. J. Boyne, and R. P. Williams, “Clinical applications of rhBMP-2 in maxillofacial surgery,” Journal of the California Dental Association, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 335–341, 2007. View at Scopus
  34. B. P. Dickinson, R. K. Ashley, K. L. Wasson et al., “Reduced morbidity and improved healing with bone morphogenic protein-2 in older patients with alveolar cleft defects,” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 209–217, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. N. Alonso, D. Y. S. Tanikawa, R. D. S. Freitas, L. Canan Jr., T. O. Ozawa, and D. L. Rocha, “Evaluation of maxillary alveolar reconstruction using a resorbable collagen sponge with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in cleft lip and palate patients,” Tissue Engineering C: Methods, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1183–1189, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. S. Asamura, Y. Mochizuki, M. Yamamoto, Y. Tabata, and N. Isogai, “Bone regeneration using a bone morphogenetic protein-2 saturated slow-release gelatin hydrogel sheet: evaluation in a canine orbital floor fracture model,” Annals of Plastic Surgery, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 496–502, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. K. Yamada, Y. Tabata, K. Yamamoto et al., “Potential efficacy of basic fibroblast growth factor incorporated in biodegradable hydrogels for skull bone regeneration,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 86, no. 5, pp. 871–875, 1997. View at Scopus
  38. Y. Tabata, K. Yamada, S. Miyamoto et al., “Bone regeneration by basic fibroblast growth factor complexed with biodegradable hydrogels,” Biomaterials, vol. 19, no. 7–9, pp. 807–815, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. Y. Tabata, K. Yamada, L. Hong, S. Miyamoto, N. Hashimoto, and Y. Ikada, “Skull bone regeneration in primates in response to basic fibroblast growth factor,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 851–856, 1999. View at Scopus
  40. A. Iwakura, Y. Tabata, M. Miyao et al., “Novel method to enhance sternal healing after harvesting bilateral internal thoracic arteries with use of basic fibroblast growth factor,” Circulation, vol. 102, no. 19, pp. III307–III311, 2000. View at Scopus
  41. A. Iwakura, Y. Tabata, N. Tamura et al., “Gelatin sheet incorporating basic fibroblast growth factor enhances healing of devascularized sternum in diabetic rats,” Circulation, vol. 104, pp. I325–I329, 2001. View at Scopus
  42. K. Hayashi, T. Kubo, K. Doi, Y. Tabata, and Y. Akagawa, “Development of new drug delivery system for implant bone augmentation using a basic fibroblast growth factor-gelatin hydrogel complex,” Dental Materials Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 170–177, 2007. View at Scopus
  43. D. M. Arm, A. F. Tencer, S. D. Bain, and D. Celino, “Effect of controlled release of platelet-derived growth factor from a porous hydroxyapatite implant on bone ingrowth,” Biomaterials, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 703–709, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. G. Pellegrini, Y. J. Seol, R. Gruber, and W. V. Giannobile, “Pre-clinical models for oral and periodontal reconstructive therapies,” Journal of Dental Research, vol. 88, no. 12, pp. 1065–1076, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. C. S. Young, P. A. Ladd, C. F. Browning et al., “Release, biological potency, and biochemical integrity of recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor-BB (rhPDGF-BB) combined with AugmentTM Bone Graft or GEM 21S beta-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP),” Journal of Controlled Release, vol. 140, no. 3, pp. 250–255, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. T. Choo, V. Marino, and P. M. Bartold, “Effect of PDGF-BB and beta-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) on bone formation around dental implants: a pilot study in sheep,” Clinical Oral Implants Research, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 158–166, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. L. Hong, S. Miyamoto, N. Hashimoto, and Y. Tabata, “Synergistic effect of gelatin microspheres incorporating TGF-β1 and a physical barrier for fibrous tissue infiltration on skull bone formation,” Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1357–1369, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. L. Hong, Y. Tabata, S. Miyamoto et al., “Promoted bone healing at a rabbit skull gap between autologous bone fragment and the surrounding intact bone with biodegradable microspheres containing transforming growth factor-β1,” Tissue Engineering, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 331–340, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. L. Hong, Y. Tabata, S. Miyamoto et al., “Bone regeneration at rabbit skull defects treated with transforming growth factor-β1 incorporated into hydrogels with different levels of biodegradability,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 315–325, 2000. View at Scopus
  50. M. Yamamoto, Y. Tabata, L. Hong, S. Miyamoto, N. Hashimoto, and Y. Ikada, “Bone regeneration by transforming growth factor β1 released from a biodegradable hydrogel,” Journal of Controlled Release, vol. 64, no. 1–3, pp. 133–142, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. T. Furumatsu, Z. N. Shen, A. Kawai et al., “Vascular endothelial growth factor principally acts as the main angiogenic factor in the early stage of human osteoblastogenesis,” The Journal of Biochemistry, vol. 133, no. 5, pp. 633–639, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. N. Casap, N. B. Venezia, A. Wilensky, and Y. Samuni, “VEGF facilitates periosteal distraction-induced osteogenesis in rabbits: a micro-computerized tomography study,” Tissue Engineering A, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 247–253, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. E. Schipani, C. Maes, G. Carmeliet, and G. L. Semenza, “Regulation of osteogenesis-angiogenesis coupling by HIFs and VEGF,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1347–1353, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. C.-J. Wang, K.-E. Huang, Y.-C. Sun et al., “VEGF modulates angiogenesis and osteogenesis in shockwave-promoted fracture healing in rabbits,” Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 114–119, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. Y. Tabata, A. Nagano, Y. Ikada, and Y. Ikada, “Biodegradation of hydrogel carrier incorporating fibroblast growth factor,” Tissue Engineering, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 127–138, 1999. View at Scopus
  56. A. Kanematsu, S. Yamamoto, M. Ozeki et al., “Collagenous matrices as release carriers of exogenous growth factors,” Biomaterials, vol. 25, no. 18, pp. 4513–4520, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. M. Bozlar, B. Aslan, A. Kalaci, L. Baktiroglu, A. N. Yanat, and A. Tasci, “Effects of human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on fracture healing in rats,” Saudi Medical Journal, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1250–1254, 2005. View at Scopus
  58. Y. Mifune, T. Matsumoto, A. Kawamoto et al., “Local delivery of granulocyte colony stimulating factor-mobilized CD34-positive progenitor cells using bioscaffold for modality of unhealing bone fracture,” Stem Cells, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1395–1405, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. K. Ishida, T. Matsumoto, K. Sasaki et al., “Bone regeneration properties of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor via neovascularization and osteogenesis,” Tissue Engineering A, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 3271–3284, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. R. Kuroda, T. Matsumoto, M. Miwa et al., “Local transplantation of G-CSF-mobilized CD34+ cells in a patient with tibial nonunion: a case report,” Cell Transplantation, vol. 20, no. 9, pp. 1491–1496, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. A. Lindemann, F. Herrmann, W. Oster et al., “Hematologic effects of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with malignancy,” Blood, vol. 74, no. 8, pp. 2644–2651, 1989. View at Scopus
  62. G. D. Demetri and J. D. Griffin, “Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and its receptor,” Blood, vol. 78, no. 11, pp. 2791–2808, 1991. View at Scopus
  63. S. Kojima and T. Matsuyama, “Stimulation of granulopoiesis by high-dose recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in children with aplastic anemia and very severe neutropenia,” Blood, vol. 83, no. 6, pp. 1474–1478, 1994. View at Scopus
  64. M. R. Bishop, S. R. Tarantolo, R. B. Geller et al., “A randomized, double-blind trial of filgrastim (granulocyte colony- stimulating factor) versus placebo following allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation,” Blood, vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 80–85, 2000. View at Scopus
  65. C. Patte, A. Laplanche, A. I. Bertozzi et al., “Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in induction treatment of children with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a randomized study of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 441–448, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. J. A. Heath, P. G. Steinherz, A. Altman et al., “Human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Children's Cancer Group Study,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1612–1617, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. B. Wittman, J. Horan, and G. H. Lyman, “Prophylactic colony-stimulating factors in children receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,” Cancer Treatment Reviews, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 289–303, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. T. Lehrnbecher, M. Zimmermann, D. Reinhardt, M. Dworzak, J. Stary, and U. Creutzig, “Prophylactic human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after induction therapy in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia,” Blood, vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 936–943, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. H. Inaba, X. Cao, S. Pounds et al., “Randomized trial of 2 dosages of prophylactic granulocyte-colony- stimulating factor after induction chemotherapy in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia,” Cancer, vol. 117, no. 6, pp. 1313–1320, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. E. R. Luvizuto, S. Tangl, G. Zanoni et al., “The effect of BMP-2 on the osteoconductive properties of β-tricalcium phosphate in rat calvaria defects,” Biomaterials, vol. 32, no. 15, pp. 3855–3861, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. H. Rojbani, M. Nyan, K. Ohya, and S. Kasugai, “Evaluation of the osteoconductivity of α-tricalcium phosphate, β-tricalcium phosphate, and hydroxyapatite combined with or without simvastatin in rat calvarial defect,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research A, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 488–498, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. E. Kato, J. Lemler, K. Sakurai, and M. Yamada, “Biodegradation property of beta-tricalcium phosphate-collagen composite in accordance with bone formation: a comparative study with bio-oss collagen in a rat critical-size defect model,” Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  73. P. Zanchetta, N. Lagarde, A. Uguen, and P. Marcorelles, “Mixture of hyaluronic acid, chondroitin 6 sulphate and dermatan sulphate used to completely regenerate bone in rat critical size defect model,” Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 783–787, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. Y. Tabata, S. Hijikata, and Y. Ikada, “Enhanced vascularization and tissue granulation by basic fibroblast growth factor impregnated in gelatin hydrogels,” Journal of Controlled Release, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 189–199, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. B. Levi, E. R. Nelson, K. Brown et al., “Differences in osteogenic differentiation of adipose-derived stromal cells from murine, canine, and human sources in vitro and in vivo,” Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 128, no. 2, pp. 373–386, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. S. V. Dorozhkin, “Calcium orthophosphate cements for biomedical application,” Journal of Materials Science, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 3028–3057, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. H.-H. Horch, R. Sader, C. Pautke, A. Neff, H. Deppe, and A. Kolk, “Synthetic, pure-phase beta-tricalcium phosphate ceramic granules (Cerasorb) for bone regeneration in the reconstructive surgery of the jaws,” International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 708–713, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. W. L. J. Weijs, T. J. H. Siebers, A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman, S. J. Bergé, G. J. Meijer, and W. A. Borstlap, “Early secondary closure of alveolar clefts with mandibular symphyseal bone grafts and β-tri calcium phosphate (β-TCP),” International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 424–429, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. J. H. Park, C. G. Choi, S. R. Jeon, S. C. Rhim, C. J. Kim, and S. W. Roh, “Radiographic analysis of instrumented posterolateral fusion mass using mixture of local autologous bone and b-TCP (polybone) in a lumbar spinal fusion surgery,” Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 267–272, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. S. Jingushi, K. Urabe, K. Okazaki et al., “Intramuscular bone induction by human recombinant bone morphogenetic protein-2 with beta-tricalcium phosphate as a carrier: in vivo bone banking for muscle-pedicle autograft,” Journal of Orthopaedic Science, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 490–494, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. A. Abarrategi, C. Moreno-Vicente, V. Ramos, I. Aranaz, J. V. Sanz Casado, and J. L. López-Lacomba, “Improvement of porous β-TCP scaffolds with rhBMP-2 chitosan carrier film for bone tissue application,” Tissue Engineering A, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 1305–1319, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. U. Maus, S. Andereya, S. Gravius, J. A. K. Ohnsorge, C. Niedhart, and C. H. Siebert, “BMP-2 incorporated in a tricalcium phosphate bone substitute enhances bone remodeling in sheep,” Journal of Biomaterials Applications, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 559–576, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. G. Matsumoto, Y. Omi, E. Kubota et al., “Enhanced regeneration of critical bone defects using a biodegradable gelatin sponge and β-tricalcium phosphate with bone morphogenetic protein-2,” Journal of Biomaterials Applications, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 327–342, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. J. Sohier, G. Daculsi, S. Sourice, K. de Groot, and P. Layrolle, “Porous beta tricalcium phosphate scaffolds used as a BMP-2 delivery system for bone tissue engineering,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research A, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 1105–1114, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. Y. Takahashi, M. Yamamoto, and Y. Tabata, “Osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells in biodegradable sponges composed of gelatin and β-tricalcium phosphate,” Biomaterials, vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 3587–3596, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. L. Xu, K. Lv, W. Zhang, X. Zhang, X. Jiang, and F. Zhang, “The healing of critical-size calvarial bone defects in rat with rhPDGF-BB, BMSCs, and β-TCP scaffolds,” Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1073–1084, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. T. Matsumoto, A. Kawamoto, R. Kuroda et al., “Therapeutic potential of vasculogenesis and osteogenesis promoted by peripheral blood CD34-positive cells for functional bone healing,” The American Journal of Pathology, vol. 169, no. 4, pp. 1440–1457, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. A. J. Laing, J. P. Dillon, E. T. Condon et al., “Mobilization of endothelial precursor cells: systemic vascular response to musculoskeletal trauma,” Journal of Orthopaedic Research, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 44–50, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. T. Matsumoto, Y. Mifune, A. Kawamoto et al., “Fracture induced mobilization and incorporation of bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells for bone healing,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 215, no. 1, pp. 234–242, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. A. Janowska-Wleczorek, M. Majka, J. Ratajczak, and M. Z. Ratajczak, “Autocrine/paracrine mechanisms in human hematopoiesis,” Stem Cells, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 99–107, 2001. View at Scopus
  91. M. Majka, A. Janowska-Wieczorek, J. Ratajczak et al., “Numerous growth factors, cytokines, and chemokines are secreted by human CD34+ cells, myeloblasts, erythroblasts, and megakaryoblasts and regulate normal hematopoiesis in an autocrine/paracrine manner,” Blood, vol. 97, no. 10, pp. 3075–3085, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. J.-L. Chen, P. Hunt, M. Mcelvain, T. Black, S. Kaufman, and E. S.-H. Choi, “Osteoblast precursor cells are found in CD34+ cells from human bone marrow,” Stem Cells, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 368–377, 1997. View at Scopus
  93. A. Iwakura, Y. Tabata, T. Koyama et al., “Gelatin sheet incorporating basic fibroblast growth factor enhances sternal healing after harvesting bilateral internal thoracic arteries,” Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 1113–1120, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. Y. Tabata, “Tissue regeneration based on growth factor release,” Tissue Engineering, vol. 9, supplement 1, pp. S5–S15, 2003. View at Scopus
  95. M. Kamitakahara, C. Ohtsuki, and T. Miyazaki, “Review paper: behavior of ceramic biomaterials derived from tricalcium phosphate in physiological condition,” Journal of Biomaterials Applications, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 197–212, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. S. Ghanaati, M. Barbeck, R. Detsch et al., “The chemical composition of synthetic bone substitutes influences tissue reactions in vivo: histological and histomorphometrical analysis of the cellular inflammatory response to hydroxyapatite, beta-tricalcium phosphate and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics,” Biomedical Materials, vol. 7, no. 1, Article ID 015005, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. B. Liu and D. X. Lun, “Current application of beta-tricalcium phosphate composites in orthopaedics,” Orthopaedic Surgery, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 139–144, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  98. N. Brouard, R. Driessen, B. Short, and P. J. Simmons, “G-CSF increases mesenchymal precursor cell numbers in the bone marrow via an indirect mechanism involving osteoclast-mediated bone resorption,” Stem Cell Research, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 65–75, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. J.-W. Jang, J.-H. Yun, K.-I. Lee et al., “Osteoinductive activity of biphasic calcium phosphate with different rhBMP-2 doses in rats,” Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontology, vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 480–487, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. T. Asahara, H. Masuda, T. Takahashi et al., “Bone marrow origin of endothelial progenitor cells responsible for postnatal vasculogenesis in physiological and pathological neovascularization,” Circulation Research, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 221–228, 1999. View at Scopus
  101. A. Taguchi, T. Soma, H. Tanaka et al., “Administration of CD34+ cells after stroke enhances neurogenesis via angiogenesis in a mouse model,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 330–338, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. H. Iwasaki, A. Kawamoto, M. Ishikawa et al., “Dose-dependent contribution of CD34-positive cell transplantation to concurrent vasculogenesis and cardiomyogenesis for functional regenerative recovery after myocardial infarction,” Circulation, vol. 113, no. 10, pp. 1311–1325, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. K. Sasaki, R. Kuroda, K. Ishida et al., “Enhancement of tendon-bone osteointegration of anterior cruciate ligament graft using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor,” The American Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 1519–1527, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. A. K. Lundgren, D. Lundgren, C. H. F. Hämmerle, S. Nyman, and L. Sennerby, “Influence of decortication of the donor bone on guided bone augmentation an experimental study in the rabbit skull bone,” Clinical Oral Implants Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 99–106, 2000. View at Scopus