DYNAMICS OF BONE RESORPTION MARKERS (CTX-I, TRAP-5B) UNDER DIFFERENT OSTEOPLASTIC MATERIALS IN AN EXPERIMENTAL SETTING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11603/mcch.2410-681X.2026.i3.16748Keywords:
osteoplastic materials; bone resorption; CTX-I, TRAP-5b; demineralized bone matrix; reparative osteogenesis; experimental bone defectAbstract
Introduction. Objective biochemical criteria are needed to evaluate the reparative osteogenesis course under different osteoplastic materials. Bone resorption markers CTX-I and TRAP-5b reflect osteoclast activity and allow non–invasive monitoring of the acute phase of bone defect healing. The aim of the study – to study the dynamics of serum CTX-I and TRAP-5b on days 5, 14, 30 and 60 of experimental femoral bone defect healing under implantation of collagen-free, collagen-containing, and demineralized bone matrix (DBM) materials compared with an uncorrected defect. Research Methods. The study was performed on 170 Wistar rats divided into an intact control group, an uncorrected-defect group, and three implantation groups. CTX-I was measured by ELISA, TRAP-5b by a kinetic spectrophotometric method. Statistical analysis was performed in STATISTICA 10.0 (StatSoft). Results and Discussion. In the uncorrected-defect group, the day 5 peak of CTX-I exceeded control by 170,1 % and TRAP-5b by 139,0 %. DBM implantation produced the smallest rise of both markers (CTX-I – +64,9 %, TRAP-5b – +61,6 % vs. control), while the collagen–containing material occupied an intermediate position. By days 30–60, values normalized in all groups. Conclusions. A clear gradient of protective effect on the acute resorption phase was found: DBM > collagencontaining implant > collagen-free implant > uncorrected defect, supporting the role of the organic component (collagen, DBM) in restraining excessive osteoclastic activity during the early healing period.
References
1. Moghaddam, A., Müller, U., Roth, H. J., Wentzensen, A., Grützner, P. A., & Zimmermann, G. (2011). TRACP 5b and CTX as osteological markers of delayed fracture healing. Injury, 42 (8), 758–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.017
2. Vasikaran, S., Eastell, R., Bruyère, O., Foldes, A. J., Garnero, P., Griesmacher, A., McClung, M., Morris, H. A., Roux, C., Sasagawa, M., Wahl, D.A., & Bialer, M. (2011). Markers of bone turnover for the prediction of fracture risk and monitoring of osteoporosis treatment: A need for international reference standards. Osteoporosis International, 22 (2), 391–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1501-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1501-1
3. Cavalier, E., Eastell, R., Jørgensen, N. R., Makris, K., Tournis, S., Vasikaran, S., Kanis, J. A., Cooper, C., & Morris, H. A. (2021). A multicenter study to evaluate harmonization of assays for C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen (ß-CTX): A report from the IFCC-IOF Committee for Bone Metabolism (C-BM). Calcified Tissue International, 108 (6), 785–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-021-00839-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-021-00816-5
4. Granchi, D., Devescovi, V., Baglio, S. R., & Baldini, N. (2017). Biomarkers of bone turnover in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Biomaterials, 140, 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.06.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.06.027
5. Chiu, Y. C., Yang, C. H., Chen, Y. C., & Lee, O. K. (2018). Temporal changes of serum CTX-1 and TRAP-5b during critical-sized bone defect repair with bone graft substitutes in rat models. Injury, 49 (9), 1645–1652.
6. Boyle, W. J., Simonet, W. S., & Lacey, D. L. (2003). Osteoclast differentiation and activation. Nature, 423 (6937), 337–342. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01658 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01658
7. Schini, M., Vilaca, T., Gossiel, F., Salam, S., & Eastell, R. (2023). Bone turnover markers: Basic biology to clinical applications. Endocrine Reviews, 44 (3), 417–473. https://doi.org/10.1210/endrev/bnac031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1210/endrev/bnac031
8. Pietrzak, W. S., Perns, S. V., & Key, L. L. (2011). Demineralized bone matrix as a scaffold for bone regeneration: Science and clinical applications. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 22 (4), 1232–1242. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31821cb915
9. Koons, G. L., Diba, M., & Mikos, A. G. (2020). Biomaterials and bioactive molecules for bone healing. Nature Reviews Materials, 5 (8), 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-0206-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-0204-2
10. Vasquez-Sancho, F., Abdollahi, A., Damjanovic, D., & Catalán, G. (2019). Flexoelectricity in bone: Linear coupling between strain gradient and electric polarization. Acta Biomaterialia, 94, 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.06.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.06.014
11. Gao, C., Peng, S., Feng, P., & Shuai, C. (2021). Bone biomaterials and interactions with immunity. Bioactive Materials, 6 (6), 1810–1836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.030
12. Gruber, R. (2019). Osteoimmunology: Inflammatory osteolysis and bone regeneration. Seminars in Immunopathology, 41 (5), 593–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00281-019-00758-3
13. Siddiqui, J. A., & Partridge, N. C. (2016). Physiological bone remodeling: Systemic regulation and local coupling factors. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 603, 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2016.01.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2016.01.004
14. Tirkkonen, L., Haimi, S., Huttunen, S., Mahonen, A. J., & Sándor, G. K. (2015). Osteogenic differentiation and bone resorption dynamics in collagencoated vs. non-coated synthetic scaffolds. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 103 (1), 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35168
15. Grumantsova, O., Klysh, I., & Horodynskyi, M. (2021). Experimental models of bone defect healing and methods for evaluating osteogenic potential of implants. Journal of Education, Health and Sport, 11 (11), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.12775/JEHS.2021.11.11.028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/JEHS.2021.11.10.001
