Preclinical therapies to prevent or treat fracture non-union: A systematic review

• Published in: PloS one 2018-08, Vol.13 (8), p.e0201077-e0201077
• Main Authors: Bennett, Philippa M, Stewart, Sarah K, Dretzke, Janine, Bem, Danai, Penn-Barwell, Jowan G
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Animal models; Biology and Life Sciences; Care and treatment; Chitosan; Clinical trials; Fracture repair; Fractures; Fractures (Injuries); Identification methods; Intervention; Laboratory animals; Medical research; Medicine and Health Sciences; Mesenchymal stem cells; Meta-analysis; Morbidity; Nonunion; Patient outcomes; Physical Sciences; Prevention; Quality of life; Research and Analysis Methods; Reviews; Studies; Systematic review
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201077

Non-union affects up to 10% of fractures and is associated with substantial morbidity. There is currently no single effective therapy for the treatment or prevention of non-union. Potential treatments are currently selected for clinical trials based on results from limited animal studies, with no attempt to compare results between therapies to determine which have the greatest potential to treat non-union. The aim of this systematic review was to define the range of therapies under investigation at the preclinical stage for the prevention or treatment of fracture non-union. Additionally, through meta-analysis, it aimed to identify the most promising therapies for progression to clinical investigation. MEDLINE and Embase were searched from 1St January 2004 to 10th April 2017 for controlled trials evaluating an intervention to prevent or treat fracture non-union. Data regarding the model used, study intervention and outcome measures were extracted, and risk of bias assessed. Of 5,171 records identified, 197 papers describing 204 therapies were included. Of these, the majority were only evaluated once (179/204, 88%), with chitosan tested most commonly (6/204, 3%). Substantial variation existed in model design, length of survival and duration of treatment, with results poorly reported. These factors, as well as a lack of consistently used objective outcome measures, precluded meta-analysis. This review highlights the variability and poor methodological reporting of current non-union research. The authors call for a consensus on the standardisation of animal models investigating non-union, and suggest journals apply stringent criteria when considering animal work for publication.