Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Allbrook, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirkaldy-Willis, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Allbrook, D.
Right arrow Articles by Kirkaldy-Willis, W. H.

THE RESTORATION OF ARTICULAR SURFACES AFTER JOINT EXCISION

David Allbrook ; and W. H. Kirkaldy-Willis

The experiments were performed to answer three main questions. These and our answers may be summarised as follows.

What is the precise mechanism of healing of a raw bony surface in a joint? What cells are involved? Where do they originate?—In all the implant experiments and in the control series the fundamental mechanism of healing was similar.

1. A massive proliferation of fibroblasts occurred from the cut periosteum, from the cut joint capsule, and to a lesser extent from the medullary canal.

2. Fibroblasts grew centripetally in the first few weeks after operation, attempting to form a "fibroblast cap" to the cut bone end.

3. Fibroblasts of this cap near the cut bone spicules metamorphosed to become prechondroblasts, chondroblasts laying down cartilage matrix, and hypertrophied (alkaline phosphatase-secreting) chondrocytes lying in a calcified matrix.

4. This calcified cartilage matrix was invaded by dilated capillaries probably bearing osteoblasts which laid down perivascular (endochondral) bone.

5. Some of the cells of projecting bone spicules died and their matrix was eroded in the presence of many osteoclasts.

6. In the control experiments of simple excision of the radial head new bone was produced at the periphery only by processes (3) and (4). This sealed off the underlying peripheral cortical bone from the superficially placed peripheral articular surface of fibrocartilage. At about a year from operation the central portion of the articular surface was still formed of bare bone, or of bone spicules covered by a thin layer of irregularly arranged collagen fibres. The opposite capitular articular cartilage was badly eroded.

Does the introduction of a dead cartilage implant over the raw bone end affect in any way the final constitution of the new articular surface?—In the implant experiments the new bone produced by processes (3) and (4) formed, after about a year, a complete cortical plate which entirely sealed off the cut end of the radius and left a superficially placed articular covering of smooth fibrocartilage, closely resembling a normal joint surface. The opposite capitular articular surface was normal.

What is the final fate of such an implant?—Whale cartilage implants underwent replacement by fibroblasts and collagen fibres, and took about nine months to disappear.

The cartilage of fixed autotransplants and homotransplants underwent similar gradual replacement, and took about the same time in each case. The dead bone, implanted in association with the cartilage in both cases, acted as a nidus for hyaline cartilage production by chondrocytes derived from fibroblasts. This cartilage underwent endochondral ossification. This observation suggests that induction by non-cellular osseous material is a factor in chondrification and ossification.

All the implants functioned as temporary articular menisci or in some cases as temporary radial articular surfaces. They were always replaced by a permanent fibrocartilaginous meniscus, or a fibrocartilaginous articular surface. An implant did, in fact, always act as a temporary protecting cap and mould for the subjacent growth offibroblasts which was necessary for the production of a satisfactory new joint surface.






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General