There are several time-groups (4 weeks, 8 weeks, 6 months, 9 months) and several alloys. Which IHC-marker should be most informative to study and compare in these groups? Especially in 6 and 9 months?
If you refer to the article below it suggests that reduced IHC expression of osteopontin (OPN) and osteocalcin (OC), after 6 months of surgery may indicate stabilization of bone-implant interface and completion of peri-implant neo-osteogenesis. It therefore outlines the possibility of LAE442 being more biocompatible than titanium alloys.
A. Bondarenko, N. Angrisani, A. Meyer-Lindenberg, J. M. Seitz, H. Waizy and J. Reifenrath
Magnesium-based bone implants: Immunohistochemical analysis of peri-implant osteogenesis by evaluation of osteopontin and osteocalcin expression Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A
Article first published online: 21 JUN 2013 | DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.34828
If you refer to the article below it suggests that reduced IHC expression of osteopontin (OPN) and osteocalcin (OC), after 6 months of surgery may indicate stabilization of bone-implant interface and completion of peri-implant neo-osteogenesis. It therefore outlines the possibility of LAE442 being more biocompatible than titanium alloys.
A. Bondarenko, N. Angrisani, A. Meyer-Lindenberg, J. M. Seitz, H. Waizy and J. Reifenrath
Magnesium-based bone implants: Immunohistochemical analysis of peri-implant osteogenesis by evaluation of osteopontin and osteocalcin expression Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A
Article first published online: 21 JUN 2013 | DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.34828
I suggest to ask Prof. Arndt Schilling (TU München) for suitable markers. OPN and OC as suggested above by Sarita are good suggestions maybe also Collagen 1 alpha. Beside that it may be useful to look for inflammation markers (which should decline when the bone/implant interface stabilizes).
Dear colleagues! Thank you all for your answers! But have any of you tried to investigate the group of growing factors? What do you think about BMP-2, for example?