Additional file 1: Figure S1. of Effects of thromboprophylaxis on mesenchymal stromal cells during osteogenic differentiation: an in-vitro study comparing enoxaparin with rivaroxaban

GAPDH Ct values show that there are no significant changes in the expression level of this gene over time and during drug treatment revealing that it can be used as housekeeping gene in this experimental set-up. (DOC 45 kb

MOESM1 of Whole bone testing in small animals: systematic characterization of the mechanical properties of different rodent bones available for rat fracture models

Additional file 1: Table S1. Data-summary: Radiological and biomechanical results of each bone

Additional file 2: Table S1. of Effects of thromboprophylaxis on mesenchymal stromal cells during osteogenic differentiation: an in-vitro study comparing enoxaparin with rivaroxaban

Showing the primer sequences. (XLSX 9 kb

Additional file 1: of Improving results in rat fracture models: enhancing the efficacy of biomechanical testing by a modification of the experimental setup

Supplemental data sheets. (PPTX 35 kb

Experimental Setup.

<p>(a) Standardized fracture: Anesthetized animal placed on the fracture device. Leg placed across an open platform. (b) Postoperative radiograph, a.p. view after fracture. A transverse fracture with minimal dislocation can be seen at the middle of the femoral shaft. (c) Setting during biomechanical testing of the specimens. The distance between the bars was adapted for each bone. All bones were loaded until failure (V-max) with a persistent test velocity of 5mm/min. Meanwhile a load-displacement diagram was recorded every 0.1 second and thereby failure load was determined. (d) Scout view scan before μCT-measurement.</p

Biomechanical Parameters.

<p>(a, b) Load-displacement diagram of corresponding bones during three-point bending. The first diagram (a) shows the fracture-curve of the control side, the second the experimental side (b). The ordinate displays the force (N), the abscisse the displacement (in mm). Different scales of the ordinate. The red line in Fig 2b displays stiffness (gradient of the linear part of the load-displacement curve). The light blue area is the work to failure (area under the curve (Nmm)).</p

Results Biomechanical Testing, V-max absolute and ratio.

<p>(a) Dot-plots of absolute V-max values for controls, Rivaroxaban and Enoxaparin; Control sides (unfractured femur) and experimental sides (fracture). No sign. differences between controls and substances. (b) Dot-plot of ratios fractured to unfractured bones in V-max for controls, Rivaroxaban and Enoxaparin. No sign. differences between controls and substances.</p

Results Micro CT Scan.

<p>Results Micro CT Scan.</p

Summary Micro-CT Scan.

<p>Micro-CT based assessment of histomorphometry, black points indicate exact data, grey arbour mean data ± standard deviation. (a) Bone Volume BV (mm³) = mineralized callus volume: Significant difference of Rivaroxaban compared to control group (p = 0,004). (b) Bone Mineral Content = BMC defined as callus BV multiplied by TMD (mg hydroxyapatite/ ccm): Significant difference of Rivaroxaban compared to control group (p < 0,05). (c) Degree of Anisotropy = DA: Significant difference of both substances compared to control group (p < 0,05). (d) Trabecular Thickness = Tb-Th (mm): Significant difference of Rivaroxaban compared to control group (p < 0,05). (e) Bone Surface = BS (mm²): Significant difference of both substances compared to control group (p < 0, 05).</p

Results Biomechanical Testing.

<p>Results Biomechanical Testing.</p