Radiographic and histological evaluations of the effects of meloxicam and flunixin meglumine on the repair of radial bone defects in a rabbit model

Document Type : Research Article


1 Graduate of Veterinary Medicine ,Faculty of veterinary medicine, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

2 Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

3 Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of veterinary medicine, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.


The current study radiographically and histologically evaluated the effects of meloxicam and flunixin meglumine on the repair of radial bone defects in a rabbit model. Ninety New Zealand White rabbits (10-12 months, 1.5-2.6 kg) were randomly assigned into three groups. Following anesthesia, defects were created on the medial surface of the radius bone of the left forelimb with a diameter and depth of 3 mm. The animals were administrated meloxicam, flunixin meglumine, and physiological serum (positive control) subcutaneously each day for 10 days. Hematoxylin and Eosin and Goldner’s trichrome stainings, along with radiograph images were prepared to investigate the effects of the administered agents. The results did not show callus formation in bone defects on days 3 and 7. Defects were filled in meloxicam and positive control groups on day 14, while they were filled on day 21 in the flunixin meglumine group. On days 14 and 21, the meloxicam group outperformed the flunixin meglumine group in terms of callus formation, but it was higher in the flunixin meglumine group on day 28. It could be concluded that the administration of meloxicam is less effective in delaying the bone healing process.


Main Subjects

1- Perez JR, Kouroupis D, Li DJ, Best TM, Kaplan L, Correa D. Tissue engineering and cell-based therapies for fractures and bone defects. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2018; 6:105. Doi:10.3389/fbioe.2018.00105.
2- Fernandez de Grado G, Keller L, Idoux-Gillet Y, Wagner Q, Musset A-M, Benkirane-Jessel N. Bone substitutes: a review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management. Journal of tissue engineering. 2018; 9:241-9. Doi: 10.1177/2041731418776819.
3- Zeng J-H, Liu S-W, Xiong L, Qiu P, Ding L-H, Xiong SL. Scaffolds for the repair of bone defects in clinical studies: a systematic review. Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research. 2018; 13 (1):1-14. Doi: 10.1186/s13018-018-0724-2.
4- Claes L, Recknagel S, Ignatius A. Fracture healing under healthy and inflammatory conditions. Nature Reviews Rheumatology. 2012 ;8 (3):133-143. Doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2012.1.
5- Batool F, Özçelik H, Stutz C, Gegout P-Y, Benkirane-Jessel N, Petit C. Modulation of immune-inflammatory responses through surface modifications of biomaterials to promote bone healing and regeneration. Journal of Tissue Engineering. 2021; 12:20-28. Doi: 10.1177/20417314211041428.
6- Khalil NY, Aldosari KF. Meloxicam. Profiles of drug substances, excipients and related methodology. 45: Elsevier. 2020.
7- Bekker A, Kloepping C, Collingwood S. Meloxicam in the management of post-operative pain: Narrative review. Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. 2018; 34 (4):450. Doi: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP-133-18.
8- Pawlukianiec C, Gryciuk ME, Mil KM, Żendzian-Piotrowska M, Zalewska A, Maciejczyk M. A new insight into meloxicam: assessment of antioxidant and anti-glycating activity in in vitro studies. Pharmaceuticals. 2020; 13 (9):240. Doi: 10.3390/ph13090240.
9- Ziegler A, Freeman C, Fogle C, Burke M, Davis J, Cook V. Multicentre, blinded, randomised clinical trial comparing the use of flunixin meglumine with firocoxib in horses with small intestinal strangulating obstruction. Equine veterinary journal. 2019; 51 (3):329-35. Doi: 10.1111/evj.13013.
10- Kleinhenz M, Van Engen N, Smith J, Gorden P, Ji J, Wang C. The impact of transdermal flunixin meglumine on biomarkers of pain in calves when administered at the time of surgical castration without local anesthesia. Livestock Science. 2018; 212:1-6.Doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2018.03.016.
11- Adamička M, Adamičková A, Danišovič L, Gažová A, Kyselovič J. Pharmacological Approaches and Regeneration of Bone Defects with Dental Pulp Stem Cells. Stem Cells International. 2021. Doi: 10.1155/2021/4593322.
12- Almaawi A, Wang HT, Ciobanu O, Rowas SA, Rampersad S, Antoniou J. Effect of acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on gene expression of mesenchymal stem cells. Tissue engineering Part A. 2013; 19 (7-8):1039-46.Doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2012.0129.
13- Lim G, Lin G-H, Monje A, Chan H-L, Wang H-L. Wound healing complications following guided bone regeneration for ridge augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2018; 33 (1). Doi: 10.11607/jomi.5581.
14- Aisa MC, Datti A, Orlacchio A, Di Renzo GC. COX inhibitors and bone: A safer impact on osteoblasts by NO-releasing NSAI.Doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2018.07.011.
15- Mohammad RF, Human T, Mostafa H, Mohammad AZ. Wound healing activity of flaxseed Linum usitatissimum L. in rats. African Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2011; 5 (21):2386-9. Doi: 10.5897/AJPP11.258.
16- Pourkarim R, Farahpour MR, Rezaei SA. Comparison effects of platelet-rich plasma on healing of infected and non-infected excision wounds by the modulation of the expression of inflammatory mediators: experimental research. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. 2022; 1-9. Doi: 10.1007/s00068-022-01907-0.
17- Rajabloo Z, Farahpour MR, Saffarian P, Jafarirad S. Biofabrication of ZnO/Malachite nanocomposite and its coating with chitosan to heal infectious wounds. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12 (1):1-17. Doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-15768-5.
18- Kenkre J, Bassett J. The bone remodelling cycle. Annals of clinical biochemistry. 2018 ;55 (3):308-27. Doi: 10.1177/0004563218759371.
19- Copuroglu C, Calori GM, Giannoudis PV. Fracture non-union: who is at risk? Injury. 2013; 44 (11), 1379-82. 
20- Spiro AS, Timo Beil F, Baranowsky A, Barvencik F, Schilling AF, Nguyen K. BMP‐7–induced ectopic bone formation and fracture healing is impaired by systemic NSAID application in C57BL/6‐mice. Journal of orthopaedic research. 2010; 28 (6), 785-791. Doi: 10.1002/jor.21044.
21- Welting T, Caron M, Emans P, Janssen M, Sanen K, Coolsen M. Inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 impacts chondrocyte hypertrophic differentiation during endochondral ossification. Eur Cell Mater. 2011; 22 (420):36. Doi: 10.22203/eCM.v022a31.
22- Burd T, Hughes M, Anglen J. Heterotopic ossification prophylaxis with indomethacin increases the risk of long-bone nonunion. The Journal of bone and joint surgery British volume. 2003; 85 (5):700-5. Doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.85B5.13970.
23- Faot F, Deprez S, Vandamme K, Camargos GV, Pinto N, Wouters J, et al. The effect of L-PRF membranes on bone healing in rabbit tibiae bone defects: micro-CT and biomarker results. Scientific reports. 2017; 7 (1):1-10. Doi: 10.1038/srep46452.
24- Via LE, Lin PL, Ray SM, Carrillo J, Allen SS, Eum SY, Taylor K, Klein E. Manjunatha U, Gonzales J, Lee EG. Tuberculous granulomas are hypoxic in guinea pigs, rabbits, and nonhuman primates. Infection and immunity. 2008; 76 (6):2333-40. Doi: 10.1128/IAI.01515-07.
  • Receive Date: 16 October 2022
  • Revise Date: 25 December 2022
  • Accept Date: 30 January 2023
  • First Publish Date: 30 January 2023