Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Dec;132(6):1542-1549.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a80766.

Amifostine protects vascularity and improves union in a model of irradiated mandibular fracture healing

Affiliations

Amifostine protects vascularity and improves union in a model of irradiated mandibular fracture healing

Deniz Sarhaddi et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Pathologic fractures of the mandible can be devastating to cancer patients and are due in large part to the pernicious effects of irradiation on bone vascularity. The authors' aim was to ascertain whether amifostine, a radioprotective drug, will preserve vascularity and improve bone healing in a murine model of irradiated mandibular fracture repair.

Methods: Rats were randomized into three groups: nonirradiated fracture (n = 9), irradiation/fracture (n = 5), and amifostine/irradiation/fracture (n = 7). Animals in the irradiation groups underwent a human equivalent dose of radiation directed at the left hemimandible. Animals treated in the amifostine group received amifostine concomitantly with radiation. All animals underwent unilateral left mandibular osteotomy with external fixation set to a 2.1-mm fracture gap. Fracture healing was allowed for 40 days before perfusion with Microfil. Vascular radiomorphometrics were quantified with micro-computed tomography.

Results: When compared with the irradiated/fractured group, amifostine treatment more than doubled the rate of fracture unions to 57 percent. Amifostine treatment also resulted in an increase in vessel number (123 percent; p < 0.05) and a corresponding decrease in vessel separation (55.5 percent; p < 0.05) there was no statistical difference in the vascularity metrics between the amifostine/irradiation/fracture group and the nonirradiated/fracture group.

Conclusions: Amifostine prophylaxis during radiation maintains mandibular vascularity at levels observed in nonirradiated fracture specimens, corresponding to improved unions. These results set the stage for clinical exploration of this targeted therapy alone and in combination with other treatments, to mitigate the effects of irradiation on bone healing and fracture repair.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Fracture Unions: Gross and Radiographic Assessment
Representative gross samples (top) from each experimental group with corresponding Maximum Intensity Projection (bottom), illustrating the line of Fx union. The non-irradiated fracture group (Fx, left) demonstrated 100% rate of bony union. The irradiated, fracture specimens (XRT/Fx, middle) demonstrated a 25% rate of bony union. With AMF treatment, the AMF/XRT/Fx group (right) achieved an improved rate of bony union: 57% after radiotherapy.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Micro-Computed Tomography
Maximum Intensity Projections of representative hemimandibular samples demonstrate qualitative differences in vascularity within the fracture gap, highlighted in yellow. The irradiated, fracture specimen (XRT/Fx, middle) exhibits a paucity of vasculature within the ROI as compared to the robust vascular supply exhibited by both the non-irradiated fracture specimen (Fx, top) and the Amifostine treated, irradiated, fracture specimen (AMF/XRT/Fx, bottom). These findings were further quantitatively verified using µCT vascular analysis.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Vessel Number
Stereological analysis of the vascular tree revealed a significant decrease in vessel number within the fracture gap due to XRT (* denotes statistical difference between Fx and XRT/Fx, p<0.05). AMF protection conferred a 123% increase in vessel number as compared to untreated specimens († denotes statistical difference between XRT/Fx and AMF/XRT/Fx, p<0.05). There was no significant difference in vessel number between Fx and AMF/XRT/Fx, indicating AMF’s therapeutic ability to maintain vessel number at levels seen in non-irradiated Fx.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Vessel Separation
Vessel separation is a measure of the distance between individual vessels, providing an inverse measure of vessel density within a region of interest- here, the fracture gap. Stereological analysis of the vascular tree within the fracture gap revealed a statistically significant 55.5% decrease in vessel separation due to AMF protection, displaying AMF’s efficacy in therapeutically maintaining vessel density within this region of interest at levels seen in non-irradiated fractured specimens. (* denotes statistical difference between Fx and XRT/Fx, † denotes statistical difference between XRT/Fx and AMF/XRT/Fx, p<0.05).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bourhis J, Overgaard J, Audry H, et al. Hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis. Lancet. 2006;368(9538):843–854. - PubMed
    1. Bonarigo BC, Rubin P. Nonunion of pathologic fracture after radiation therapy. Radiology. 1967;88:889–898. - PubMed
    1. Ezsias A, Sugar W. Pathological Fractures of the Mandible: A Diagnostic and Treatment Dilemma. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1994;32:303–306. - PubMed
    1. Gerhards F, Kuffner HD, Wagner W. Pathological fractures of the mandible: A review of the etiology and treatment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;27:186–190. - PubMed
    1. Moulton-Barret R, Rubinstein AJ, Salzhauer MA, et al. Complications of mandibular fractures. Ann Plast Surg. 1998;41:258–263. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms