ABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To estimate zonal variation of GAG content in reparative cartilage after matrix associated autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) using delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the cartilage (dGEMRIC).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Seven patients (14 cartilage defects) undergoing MACI were recruited for examination with dGEMRIC at 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure to calculate global and zonal longitudinal relaxivity (Δ R1) of the normal cartilage and reparative cartilage.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The mean Δ R1 values of normal cartilage were significantly lower than those of reparative cartilage after MACI. A significant decrease was noted in the mean Δ R1 values from the deep layer to the superficial layer in the reparative cartilage at the 3 examinations. The Δ R1 values of the reparative cartilage showed no significant variation between 3 months and 6 months, but a significant decrease in the Δ R1 values occurred at 12 months.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>dGEMRIC is feasible to assess cartilage repair noninvasively following MACI.</p>
Subject(s)
Humans , Cartilage , Pathology , Chondrocytes , Transplantation , Gadolinium , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Orthopedic ProceduresABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the value of T2 mapping in monitoring the repaired cartilage after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation/transplantation (MACI/MACT).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Four patients (10 plug cartilages) were examined three times by T2 mapping at 1, 3, and 6 months using a 3.0 Tesla MR scan system. Quantitative mean (full-thickness) T2 values were calculated in the transplanted area and control cartilage. Paired t-tests were used to compare the T2 values between transplanted and control cartilage. For analysis of longitudinal T2 values, one-way analyses of variance were performed among 1, 3, and 6 months after MACI.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The mean T2 values of the transplanted area at 1, 3, and 6 months after MACI were (82.40±15.23), (71.09±13.06), (53.80±4.86) ms, respectively. There were significant differences between the transplanted and control cartilage at 1 and 3 months (both P<0.01) after MACI, but not at 6 months (P=0.196). There were significant differences among T2 values of 1, 3, and 6 months after MACI in transplanted area (P=0.03).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>T2 mapping provides a useful tool for monitoring the biochemical development of the transplanted cartilage and can be used to evaluate the cartilage repair noninvasively.</p>
Subject(s)
Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Cartilage, Articular , Wounds and Injuries , General Surgery , Cell Transplantation , Magnetic Resonance ImagingABSTRACT
<p><b>AIM</b>To study the pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of probucol inclusion complex capsule.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Following oral administration of a single dose of 250 mg of conventional tablet (formulation A, purchased from the market) and probucol inclusion complex capsule (formulation B, a new formulation for preclinical trial) to each of 6 healthy dogs in a randomized crossover design, the plasma levels of the active drug at different time points were determined by HPLC and the plasma concentration-time profiles of formulation A and B were obtained. The pharmacokinetic parameters as well as relative bioavailability were analyzed.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The concentration-time curves of formulation A and formulation B were found to fit a two-compartment open model. The Tmax values of formulation A and formulation B were (9.3 +/- 2.1) h and (9.3 +/- 2.1) h, the Cmax values were (1.5 +/- 1.0) microgram.mL-1 and (2.3 +/- 0.9) microgram.mL-1 and the AUC0-240 values were (85 +/- 56) microgram.h.mL-1 and (134 +/- 55) microgram.h.mL-1, respectively. The relative bioavailability of formulation B was found to be (198 +/- 90)% compared with formulation A. The results of variance analysis and two one-side t-test showed that there was significant difference between the two formulations in the AUC0-240.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The high bioavailability by the inclusion of formulation B is attributed to the improvement of its water-solubility by the inclusion process and this is supposed to be a key factor for improving drug bioavailability.</p>