Recovery periods restore mechanosensitivity to dynamically loaded bone
Author:
Robling Alexander G.12, Burr David B.12, Turner Charles H.2
Affiliation:
1. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, 635 Barnhill Drive, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA and 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Biomechanics and Biomaterials Research Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
Abstract
SUMMARY
Bone cells are capable of sensing and responding to mechanical forces, but mechanosensitivity begins to decline soon after the stimulus is initiated. Under continued stimulation, bone is desensitized to mechanical stimuli. We sought to determine the amount of time required to restore mechanosensitivity to desensitized bone cells in vivo by manipulating the recovery time (0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4 or 8 h) allowed between four identical daily loading bouts. We also investigated the osteogenic effectiveness of shorter-term recovery periods, lasting several seconds (0.5, 3.5, 7 or 14 s), introduced between each of 36 identical daily loading cycles. Using the rat tibia four-point bending model, the right tibia of 144 adult female Sprague-Dawley rats was subjected to bending, sham bending or no loading. In the rats receiving recovery periods between loading bouts, histomorphometric measurements from the endocortical surface of the loaded and nonloaded control (left) tibiae revealed more than 100 % higher relative bone formation rates in the 8 h recovery group than in the 0 and 0.5 h recovery groups. Approximately 8 h of recovery was sufficient to restore full mechanosensitivity to the cells. In the rats allowed time to recover between load cycles, 14 s of recovery resulted in significantly higher (66–190 %) relative bone formation rates compared to any of the three shorter recovery periods. In both experiments, bone formation in the sham-bending animals was similar to that in the nonloaded control group. The results demonstrate the importance of recovery periods for (i) restoring mechanosensitivity to bone cells and (ii) maximizing the osteogenic effects of mechanical loading (exercise) regimens.
Publisher
The Company of Biologists
Subject
Insect Science,Molecular Biology,Animal Science and Zoology,Aquatic Science,Physiology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference32 articles.
1. Akhter, M. P., Raab, D. M., Turner, C. H., Kimmel, D. B. and Recker, R. R. (1992). Characterization of in vivo strain in the rat tibia during external application of a four-point bending load. J. Biomech.25, 1241–1246. 2. Banes, A. J., Tsuzaki, M., Yamamoto, J., Fischer, T., Brigman, B., Brown, T. and Miller, L. (1995). Mechanoreception at the cellular level: the detection, interpretation and diversity of responses to mechanical signals. Biochem. Cell Biol.73, 349–365. 3. Brand, R. A. and Stanford, C. M. (1994). How connective tissues temporally process mechanical stimuli. Med. Hypoth.42, 99–104. 4. Bünemann, M., Lee, K. B., Pals-Rylaarsdam, R., Roseberry, A. G. and Hosey, M. M. (1999). Desensitization of G-protein-coupled receptors in the cardiovascular system. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 61, 169–192. 5. Chambers, T. J., Evans, M., Gardner, T. N., Turner-Smith, A. and Chow, J. W. M. (1993). Induction of bone formation in rat tail vertebrae by mechanical loading. Bone Miner. 20, 167–178.
Cited by
159 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|