JBJS welcomes reader comments on published articles. Letters to the Editor are reviewed by JBJS editors but are not peer-reviewed. To submit your letter, please follow the "submit a response" link that appears in the content box at the upper right of the full text of the article.

Letters to the Editor to:

Scientific Articles:
Matthew Boes, Michael Kain, Sanjeev Kakar, Fred Nicholls, Dennis Cullinane, Louis Gerstenfeld, Thomas A. Einhorn, and Paul Tornetta, III
Osteogenic Effects of Traumatic Brain Injury on Experimental Fracture-Healing
J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 738-743 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]
*Letters to the Editor: Submit a response to this article

Electronic letters published:

[Read Letter to the Editor] Dr. Kain responds to Dr. Garland
Michael S. Kain, M.D.   (15 June 2006)
[Read Letter to the Editor] Fracture Healing in Traumatic Brain or Spinal Cord Injury
Douglas E. Garland   (15 May 2006)

Dr. Kain responds to Dr. Garland 15 June 2006
Previous Letter to the Editor Top
Michael S. Kain, M.D.
Boston University Medical Center, Boston, MA

Send letter to journal:
Re: Dr. Kain responds to Dr. Garland

mikain{at}bmc.org Michael S. Kain, M.D.

I thank Dr Garland for his interest in our article and would respond to his comment that we “dismissed” the finding of a smaller fracture callus. The results of our study demonstrated that the animals with traumatic brain injury had a smaller callus, a stiffer callus, and mesenchymal stem cells proliferated in their serum in vitro. As stated in the papeer, we felt this was unexpected because large exuberant callus formation has been associated with TBI and fracture healing from clinical observations. From our past experience with the fracture model in our study, we felt the smaller callus in combination with stiffer callus, represented faster healing as a result of head trauma.

As to the exact mechanism that controls this and how they are related is a matter of speculation, and it may involve the proliferation of mesenchymal stem cells. Dr. Garland proposes other possibilities as to the relationship that exists and our model may help to elicit some of the relationships in the lab over time, but there is not enough science to prove or disprove these theories at this time. Furthermore, the clinical scenario we are trying to emulate usually has many variables involved and are difficult to account for in clinical trials.

The aim of our study was to create a model removing the multiple variables typically associated with polytrauma, in an attempt to begin the arduous process of eliciting the biological relationship between traumatic brain injuries and fracture healing. This model could also be used to assess the biological relationship between spinal cord injuries and fracture healing. I appreciate Dr. Garland’s interest in our study and his contributions to this area of research and invite him and others to continue to look for answers to a very complicated and interesting area of research.
Fracture Healing in Traumatic Brain or Spinal Cord Injury 15 May 2006
Next Letter to the Editor Top
Douglas E. Garland,
Staff Physician
Rancho Los Amigos Rehabilitation Center

Send letter to journal:
Re: Fracture Healing in Traumatic Brain or Spinal Cord Injury

dougarland{at}msn.com Douglas E. Garland

To the Editor: I read with interest the article by Boes et al, “Osteogenic Effects of Traumatic Brain Injury on Experimental Fracture-Healing.” The emphasis of the article was on the presence of an osteogenic factor in the serum. Only a single paragraph was devoted to the finding of a “smaller callus size” of the femur in traumatic brain injured (TBI) rats compared to controls at three weeks. The authors stated that this finding was “unexpected” and seemingly dismissed it.

However, I found this finding most informative since it could confirm or at least be consistent with our clinical observations on standard fracture healing in this population (1,2). Why is a smaller callus an unexpected finding? Multiple explanations could be proposed: immobility; decreased weight bearing; poor nutrition; metabolic and neurologic instability; and negative nitrogen balance, to name a few. Contradictory findings of circulating osteogenic factors with a normal or delayed fracture response are not mutually exclusive. Some TBI and spinal cord injured (SCI) individuals initially cling to life on support systems and fracture healing might well be downstream in the metabolic food chain. One could even speculate that without the additional osteogenic factors, non unions would be more common. We too believe there are factors which could potentiate fracture healing in TBI and (SCI) populations simply on the basis of heterotopic ossification (HO) (3). Recently HO has been detected in patients with chemically induced paralysis for adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) – no neurologic insult or spasticity (4). The sites of HO are similar to SCI and TBI but the knee appears to the most common site (as opposed to the hip). The proposed mechanism for HO formation in this entity is similar to the mechanism proposed for fracture healing by the authors. Complete SCI individuals develop rapid and severe lower extremity osteoporosis. Although circulating osteogenic factors may be present, we believe neurogenic osteoporosis predominates and extremity fractures must be treated aggressively to achieve union. “Benign neglect” is not consistent with union. Non-unions and delayed unions are at least as common, if not more common, than rapid unions and are problematic when they occur both in the acute and chronic state (5). We still have not observed, in our 30 year clinical experience, rapid long bone fracture union in the TBI population. As the authors correctly noted HO plus fracture callus especially in the more central locations may be misinterpreted as exuberant fracture callus (6,7). Ingredients (circulating osteogenic factors) may be assembled at the “bench” but confirmation or “proof in the clinical pudding” may only occur with documentations of rapid union in a survey of long bone fractures, especially the tibia, in either population. REFERENCES 1) Garland DE. Clinical observations on fractures and heterotopic ossification in the spinal cord and traumatic brain injured populations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;233:86-101. 2) Kushwaha VP, Garland D. Extremity fractures in patients with a traumatic brain injury. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1988;6:298-307. 3) Garland DE. A clinical perspective on common forms of acquired heterotopic ossification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;263:13-29. 4) Hewitt MS, Garland DE, Ayyoub Z. Heterotopic Ossification complicating prolonged intubation: Case report and review of the literature. J Spinal Cord Med. 2002;25:46-49. 5) Garland DE, Adkins RA, Co-Editors. Extremity fractures and their treatment. Top in Spinal Cord Inj Rehab. 2005;11:1-78. 6) Garland DE, Miller G. Fractures and dislocations about the hip in head injured adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1984;186:154-158. 7) Garland DE, O’Halleren RM. Fractures and dislocations about the elbow in the head-injured adult. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1982;168:38-41.