A team of researchers from several institutions has developed a new rat model that simulates traumatic or surgical muscle tissue loss in humans. This work pushed forward the work underway to develop tissue engineering solutions to repair and replace damaged and lost muscle. The research is described in an article in BioResearch Open Access, a bimonthly peer-reviewed open access journal from Mary Ann Lieberg, Inc., publishers. The article is available free on the BioResearch Open Access website.
Tissue Engineering for Trauma: New Model

Xiaowu Wu, M.D., Benjamin T. Corona, Ph.D., Xiaoyu Chen, Ph.D., and Thomas J. Walters, Ph.D., United States Army Institute of Surgical Research (Fort Sam Houston, Texas), Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine (Winston-Salem, North Carolina), and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, provide a detailed description of the methods used to create an animal model with approximately 20% volumetric muscle loss (VML) from the middle third of the tibialis anterior muscle. The authors demonstrate successful repair of the injury using a biological scaffold and present their findings in, “A Standardized Rat Model of Volumetric Muscle Loss Injury for the Development of Tissue Engineering Therapies.”
Dr. Walters told OTW, “Volumetric muscle loss (VML) is common on the battlefield. Our work demonstrates that the impact of VML extends well beyond the wound site. Evidence of continuous muscle degeneration and regeneration, and extensive fibrosis is present throughout the entirety of the muscle months after the injury. Clinically, this means that judging the magnitude of VML injury based on the wound alone underestimates the extent of injury. Currently, all animal and clinical research is aimed at regenerating neo-muscle to replace lost tissue. Our work demonstrates research for developing treatments aimed at the remaining muscle mass may provide clinical benefits as well and provide an opportunity to make incremental improvements in treating VML.”

Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.