Javaid Sajjad, Rashid Hamad Bin, Safdar Ayesha, Chaudhry Mamoona
Department of Veterinary Surgery, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Vet World. 2024 Sep;17(9):2036-2043. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2024.2036-2043. Epub 2024 Sep 13.
Fracture healing can cause serious complications, both preoperatively and postoperatively, including malunion or non-union. Biomaterials can enhance the fracture healing process. This study aimed to compare platelet-rich plasma (PRP)-chitosan and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF)-chitosan on the basis of biochemical parameters for fracture treatment in rabbits.
This study involved 12 clinically healthy rabbits. After preparing PRP and PRF, a 3-mm bone defect was created in the tibia of each rabbit. The animals were divided randomly into two groups (A and B). Group A received PRP-Chitosan, and Group B received PRF-Chitosan. Bone healing was assessed using biochemical parameters (calcium [Ca], phosphorus [P], serum alkaline phosphatase [ALP], and osteocalcin [Ocn]) at 2-, 4-, 6-, and 8-week postoperatively. The data were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance (p < 0.05) with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences statistical software.
Group-wise comparison showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the groups, except for ALP levels, which were significantly higher in Group B than in Group A (p < 0.05). In the week-wise comparison, there was a significant difference between both groups, as Ca and ALP levels showed significant differences at all weeks postoperatively, whereas Ocn showed a significant difference at 2- and 4-week postoperatively (p < 0.05). However, there was no difference in P levels between the groups at any post-operative week (p > 0.05).
Both combinations enhanced bone regeneration. However, PRF-Chitosan is a better combination for bone repair than PRP-Chitosan. There were some limitations of this study, such as a small sample size, only male rabbits were used, and a lack of mechanical testing; these limitations should be addressed in future studies. The insights gained from the present study may open a new approach to the use of a combination of biomaterials for bone healing, which should be further investigated clinically and in other animal models as a future scope.
骨折愈合在术前和术后均可能引发严重并发症，包括骨愈合不良或骨不连。生物材料能够促进骨折愈合过程。本研究旨在基于生化参数比较富血小板血浆（PRP）-壳聚糖和富血小板纤维蛋白（PRF）-壳聚糖对兔骨折治疗的效果。
本研究纳入12只临床健康的兔。制备PRP和PRF后，在每只兔的胫骨上制造一个3毫米的骨缺损。将动物随机分为两组（A组和B组）。A组接受PRP-壳聚糖，B组接受PRF-壳聚糖。在术后2周、4周、6周和8周，使用生化参数（钙[Ca]、磷[P]、血清碱性磷酸酶[ALP]和骨钙素[Ocn]）评估骨愈合情况。使用社会科学统计软件包，通过重复测量方差分析（p<0.05）对数据进行比较。
组间比较显示，除ALP水平外，两组之间无显著差异（p>0.05），B组的ALP水平显著高于A组（p<0.05）。在逐周比较中，两组之间存在显著差异，因为Ca和ALP水平在术后各周均显示出显著差异，而Ocn在术后2周和4周显示出显著差异（p<0.05）。然而，在任何术后周，两组之间的P水平均无差异（p>0.05）。
两种组合均能促进骨再生。然而，PRF-壳聚糖在骨修复方面比PRP-壳聚糖是更好的组合。本研究存在一些局限性，如样本量小、仅使用雄性兔以及缺乏力学测试；这些局限性应在未来研究中加以解决。本研究获得的见解可能为使用生物材料组合促进骨愈合开辟一种新方法，作为未来的研究方向，应在临床和其他动物模型中进一步研究。
