Control Group Selection in Preclinical Rat Bone Defect Models: A Systematic Review
Source abstract
Abstract
Large bone defects and loss present major orthopedic challenges. In preclinical research, femoral bone defects in rats are commonly used as in vivo models to evaluate new osteoregenerative biomaterials. These test items are typically compared to negative and positive controls. This review aims to summarize the different control groups used to evaluate new osteoregenerative test items in preclinical rat femoral defect models and to identify potential pitfalls related to these controls, ultimately to enhance the future translational success. The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO, and no specific funding was received for this work. The systematic search comprised publications between January 2001 and January 2023. 436 studies were included for analysis. The choice of control groups was inconsistent across studies. A negative (e.g., empty defects or inert carriers) and positive (e.g., bone grafts or commercially available bone substitutes) control group was included in 56% (n = 245/436) and 34% (n = 149/436) of the included studies, respectively. Notably, 25% (n = 109/436) of the studies did not include any control group. Bone grafts were used as positive controls in 50% of the studies that included positive controls (n = 74/149), mainly of allogeneic origin (45%, n = 33/74). The control groups used to evaluate the test item impacted the healing comparison, with 81% of studies showing better healing of their test items compared to negative control (n = 198/245) versus 54% compared to positive control (n = 80/149). A qualitative risk-of-bias and reporting assessment was performed using an integrated ARRIVE–SYRCLE framework. Most studies demonstrated moderate concern in several domains, with frequent absence of randomization (67%, high concern) and blinding (84%, high concern), incomplete reporting of inclusion/exclusion criteria (74%, moderate concern), and variable clarity regarding animal characteristics and statistical methodology. The variability in the choice of control groups appears to influence study outcomes. Inadequate control group selection can lead to misleading conclusions regarding the efficacy of new biomaterials. Therefore, standardizing control group selection is crucial to enhance the reliability and comparability of preclinical research findings.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Bone Tissue Engineering Materials · Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments · Bone fractures and treatments
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
AO Research Institute Davos, 7270 Davos, Switzerland
Vetsuisse-Faculty Bern, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
Vetsuisse-Faculty Zurich, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Osteoporosis in Europe: A compendium of country-specific reports10.1007/s11657-021-00969-8 ↗
2. Comparisons of Efficacy between Autograft and Allograft on Defect Repair In Vivo in Normal and Osteoporotic Rats10.1155/2020/9358989 ↗
3. Autologous bone graft: Is it still the gold standard?10.1016/j.injury.2021.01.043 ↗
4. Autograft versus BMPs for the treatment of non-unions: What is the evidence?10.1016/S0020-1383(13)70009-3 ↗
5. Bone substitutes in orthopaedic surgery: From basic science to clinical practice10.1007/s10856-014-5240-2 ↗
6. Autologous bone graft: Properties and techniques10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181cec4a1 ↗
7. Autologous bone graft harvesting: A review of grafts and surgical techniques10.1007/s12306-015-0351-6 ↗
8. The biology of bone grafting10.5435/00124635-200501000-00010 ↗
9. Site selection and pain outcome after autologous bone graft harvest10.1177/1071100713511434 ↗
10. Autograft and nonunions: Morbidity with intramedullary bone graft versus iliac crest bone graft10.1016/j.ocl.2009.07.006 ↗
11. Autograft, Allograft, and Bone Graft Substitutes: Clinical Evidence and Indications for Use in the Setting of Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery10.1097/BOT.0000000000001420 ↗
12. Preclinical models for orthopedic research and bone tissue engineering10.1002/jor.23824 ↗
13. Bone defect animal models for testing efficacy of bone substitute biomaterials
14. Rodent models in bone-related research: The relevance of calvarial defects in the assessment of bone regeneration strategies10.1258/la.2010.010085 ↗
15. A review of biomaterials in bone defect healing, remaining shortcomings and future opportunities for bone tissue engineering: The unsolved challenge10.1302/2046-3758.73.BJR-2017-0270.R1 ↗
16. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews10.1136/bmj.n71 ↗
17. Effect of age on femur whole-bone bending strength of mature rat10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2022.105828 ↗
18. Rat bone properties and their relationship to gait during growth10.1242/jeb.203554 ↗
19. Sun, Y., Helmholz, H., and Willumeit-Romer, R. (2022). Surgical Classification for Preclinical Rat Femoral Bone Defect Model: Standardization Based on Systematic Review, Anatomical Analysis and Virtual Surgery. Bioengineering, 9.10.3390/bioengineering9090476 ↗
20. Comparison of Historical Control Data in Two Strains of Rat Used in Carcinogenicity Studies
21. The critical size bony defect in a small animal for bone healing studies (I): Comparative anatomical study on rats’ femur10.1515/BMT.2005.015 ↗
22. Mestre, H., Ramirez, M., Garcia, E., Martiñón, S., Cruz, Y., Campos, M.G., and Ibarra, A. (2015). Lewis, Fischer 344, and sprague-dawley rats display differences in lipid peroxidation, motor recovery, and rubrospinal tract preservation after spinal cord injury. Front. Neurol., 6.10.3389/fneur.2015.00108 ↗
23. Ortona, E., Pagano, M.T., Capossela, L., and Malorni, W. (2023). The Role of Sex Differences in Bone Health and Healing. Biology, 12.10.3390/biology12070993 ↗
24. Influence of gender and fixation stability on bone defect healing in middle-aged rats: A pilot study10.1007/s11999-011-1914-y ↗
25. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.130 ↗
26. Evaluation of Preclinical Models for the Testing of Bone Tissue-Engineered Constructs10.1089/ten.tec.2019.0213 ↗
27. Multi-level femoral morphology and mechanical properties of rats of different ages10.1016/j.bone.2015.03.022 ↗
28. Age and ovariectomy impair both the normalization of mechanical properties and the accretion of mineral by the fracture callus in rats10.1016/S0736-0266(00)90034-2 ↗
29. Decisive differences in the bone repair processes of the metaphysis and diaphysis in young mice10.1016/j.bonr.2017.11.003 ↗
30. Effect of ovariectomy induced osteoporosis on metaphysis and diaphysis repair process10.1016/j.injury.2021.02.020 ↗
31. Inoue, S., Takito, J., and Nakamura, M. (2021). Site-Specific Fracture Healing: Comparison between Diaphysis and Metaphysis in the Mouse Long Bone. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 22.10.3390/ijms22179299 ↗
32. The epidemiology of adult fractures according to the AO/OTA fracture classification
33. Fracture nonunion in long bones: A literature review of risk factors and surgical management10.1016/j.injury.2020.11.029 ↗
34. Modeling trauma in rats: Similarities to humans and potential pitfalls to consider10.1186/s12967-019-2052-7 ↗
35. Fleischhacker, E., Sprecher, C.M., Milz, S., Saller, M.M., Gleich, J., Siebenbürger, G., Helfen, T., Böcker, W., and Ockert, B. (2022). Functional outcomes before and after implant removal in patients with posttraumatic shoulder stiffness and healed proximal humerus fractures: Does implant material (PEEK vs. titanium) have an impact?—A pilot study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 23.10.1186/s12891-022-05061-x ↗
36. Absolute and relative stabilities for fracture fixation: The concept revisited10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30766-0 ↗
37. Biomechanics of two external fixator devices used in rat femoral fractures10.1002/jor.24034 ↗
38. Small animal bone healing models: Standards, tips, and pitfalls results of a consensus meeting10.1016/j.bone.2011.07.007 ↗
39. A standardized critical size defect model in normal and osteoporotic rats to evaluate bone tissue engineered constructs10.1155/2014/348635 ↗
40. Long bone uninfected non-union: Grafting techniques10.1530/EOR-24-0032 ↗
41. Haubruck, P., Ober, J., Heller, R., Miska, M., Schmidmaier, G., and Tanner, M.C. (2018). Complications and risk management in the use of the reaming-irrigator-aspirator (RIA) system: RIA is a safe and reliable method in harvesting autologous bone graft. PLoS ONE, 13.10.1371/journal.pone.0196051 ↗
42. Comparison of Anterior Iliac Crest Versus Proximal Tibia Autologous Bone Graft Harvesting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1053/j.jfas.2022.10.004 ↗
43. Rat model of an autologous cancellous bone graft10.1038/s41598-021-97573-0 ↗
44. Surgical technique and comparison of autologous cancellous bone grafts from various donor sites in rats10.1002/jor.25429 ↗
45. The absence of immediate stimulation delays bone healing10.1016/j.bone.2023.116834 ↗
46. Harvesting Autogenous Cancellous Bone Graft from the Anterior Iliac Crest10.2106/JBJS.ST.17.00068 ↗
47. Factors influencing arthrodesis rates in a rabbit posterolateral spine model with iliac crest autograft10.1007/s00586-013-3074-0 ↗
48. Efficacy of a synthetic calcium phosphate with submicron surface topography as autograft extender in lapine posterolateral spinal fusion10.1002/jbm.b.34301 ↗
49. Repair of sheep long bone cortical defects filled with COLLOSS, COLLOSS E, OSSAPLAST, and fresh iliac crest autograft10.1002/jbm.b.30751 ↗
50. Successful transpedicular lumbar interbody fusion by means of a composite of osteogenic protein-1 (rhBMP-7) and hydroxyapatite carrier: A comparison with autograft and hydroxyapatite in the sheep spine10.1097/00007632-200212010-00009 ↗