Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ABSTRACT
Periodontitis, a recognized disease worldwide, is bacterial infectioninduced inflammation of the periodontal tissues that results in loss of alveolar bone. Once it occurs, damaged tissue cannot be restored to its original
form, even if decontaminating treatments are performed. For more than
half a century, studies have been conducted to investigate true periodontal
regeneration. Periodontal regeneration is the complete reconstruction of
the damaged attachment apparatus, which contains both hard tissue (alveolar bone and cementum) and soft tissue (periodontal ligament). Several
treatments, including bone grafts, guided tissue regeneration with physical
barriers for epithelial cells, and growth factors have been approved for clinical use; however, their indications and outcomes are limited. To overcome
these limitations, the concept of tissue engineering was introduced. Combination treatment using cells, growth factors, and scaffolds, has been
studied in experimental animal models, and some studies have been translated into clinical trials. In this review, we focus on recent progressive tissue engineering studies and discuss future perspectives on periodontal
C 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
regeneration. Anat Rec, 297:1625, 2014. V
Key words: periodontal tissue; periodontal regeneration; periodontal ligament; bone; cementum; stem cells;
cytotherapy; clinical trials
17
Fig. 2. Higher magnification of the palatal side of Fig. 1 (natural periodontal tissue). Sections were stained with Azan (left) or hematoxylin
eosin (right). D: dentin, C: cementum, PDL: periodontal ligament, B:
alveolar bone (bars, 50 mm).
Fig. 3. Higher magnification of the buccal side of Fig. 1 (spontaneous healing model). The most coronal area of newly formed periodontal tissue. Note newly formed cementum covering the rough surface of
dentin. Arrowhead shows the coronal extention of new cementum. In
this case, well-oriented fibers between cementum to alveolar bone
was not observed (bar, 50 mm).
PERIODONTAL TISSUE
Periodontal tissue consists of four component structures: alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, cementum,
18
IWATA ET AL.
and gingiva (Figs. 13). Specifically, alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, and cementum are called the
attachment apparatus and are the target tissues for
periodontal regeneration (Fig. 2).
Bone graft regeneration is still somewhat controversial; bone grafts may not always regenerate true periodontal tissue with well-oriented fibers anchoring the
cementum to the alveolar bone (Mellonig, 1992). Histological analyses have revealed that LJE between the
alveolar bone and root surface often migrate apically. In
addition, root resorption and ankylosis are occasionally
observed (Table 1).
Clinical studies have shown that the gain of bone
height is 3.0 mm irrespective of the type of bone graft
material (Mellonig, 1992). The gold standard for bone
grafting is autologous bone, which is capable of osteogenesis, osteoinduction, and osteoconduction. For these
grafts, a portion of bone is taken from a healthy site of
the patient receiving the graft. The advantage of autologous bone is that it inherently has the vital structures of
bone tissue and contains cells, minerals, and proteins.
The disadvantages of autologous bone grafts are the
patient morbidities at the removal sites and limited
amount of bone that can be harvested.
As a result of these disadvantages, many allogeneic
bone grafts and xenograft materials have been investigated and approved and are commercially available
(Miron and Zhang, 2012). However, clinicians must
consider the potential risks of disease transmission,
rejection, and resorption when using these grafts. There
are two types of allografts: demineralized freeze-dried
bone allografts and freeze-dried bone allografts. Both of
these types of allografts are chemically pretreated,
retaining osteoinductive proteins such as BMPs and
TGF-bs, to enhance the osteoinduction of endogenous
mesenchymal stromal cells. It is thought that the
process of demineralization enhances the release of
inherent growth factors, such as BMPs (Urist, 1965).
Xenografts are derived from non-human species, such
as bovine, porcine, or equine animals. They are usually
sintered and chemically pretreated to remove their antigenicity. The advantage of these products is that the
shape of the gragt can be retained, because the resorption of these materials is relatively slow. Although they
are only capable of osteoconductivity, the safety and
efficacy of these products have been proved clinically
(Camelo et al., 1998; Richardson et al., 1999).
Because of the risks associated with allograft and
xenograft materials, researchers have also investigated
19
Autologous bone
Allogeneic bone
Demineralized
freeze-dried
bone allograft (DFDBA)
Freeze-dried bone
allograft (DFDBA)
Xenogeneic bone
Artificial
materials
Sintered
hydroxyapatite (HA)
b-tricalcium phosphate (TCP)
Natural products
(coral, citosan etc.)
Benefit
Risk
Osteogenic, osteoinductive
and osteoconductive no
immunological rejection
living cells and matrices
Osteoinudctive and
osteoconductive
Osteoinudctive and
osteoconductive
Osteoconductive
Osteoconductive
Osteoconductive
Osteoconductive,
low immunological
rejection
synthesized graft materials, including polymer and inorganic composite grafts, to regenerate bone [see in review
(Rezwan et al., 2006)]. Specifically hydroxyapatite (HA)
and b-tricalcium phosphate (b-TCP) have been studied
in human periodontal defect models. Although synthesized materials are only osteoconductive (not osteogenic
or osteoinductive), they can successfully restore bone
defects if the environment is favorable. Recently, moldable in situ hardening polylactide-coated TCP has been
developed and applied to repair bone defects in rabbits;
the results showed good biocompatibility (Schmidlin
et al., 2013).
Natural products, such as coral, have also been investigated for bone grafting because their structures are
similar to those of bone (Damien and Revell, 2004). Like
synthetic materials, natural products are only osteoconductive, but they are cost-effective and considered to
pose no risk to human health.
defects (Heijl et al., 1997). A meta-analysis (eight trials) showed that EMD-treated sites displayed statistically significant improvements compared with sites
treated with flap surgery (Esposito et al., 2009). The
main component of EMD is amelogenin, a majority of
enamel proteins, and amelogenin is believed to possess
the properties needed to regenerate periodontal tissue
because the expression of amelogenin was observed in
developing dental root (Hammarstrom, 1997). In addition to enamel matrix proteins, several studies have
demonstrated that EMD contains small amount of
growth factors, such as BMPs (Iwata et al., 2002; Johnson et al., 2009) and TGF-b1 (Suzuki et al., 2005),
explaining the complex effects of EMD. A particularly
interesting study found that propylene glycol alginate
(PGA), the vehicle of EMD, has antibacterial properties, suggesting that the combination of EMD and PGA
enhances not only periodontal (Sculean et al., 2001)
but also epithelial wound healing (Mirastschijski et al.,
2004; Al-Hezaimi et al., 2012).
20
IWATA ET AL.
21
Fig. 5. Class II furcation defects were created surgically at mandibular first molar (a), and the osseous defects were filled with rubber
base impression materials to induce inflammation (b). At the same
time, premolars were extracted to make PDLSC sheets. Eight weeks
after the first surgery (c), the transplantation of PDLSC sheets was
22
IWATA ET AL.
harvested from patients by scraping, and an explant culture was performed in each case. Coagulated PRP and
porous HA granules were placed into the infrabony
defects, and 6-week-cultured periosteum sheets were
autologously transplanted in 15 patients (Yamamiya
et al., 2008; Okuda et al., 2009). The results showed that
the cultured periosteum sheets transplantation exhibited
a statistically significant improvement in clinical attachment gain, vertical relative attachment gain, and radiographic infrabony defect fill as compared with the
control.
Fig. 6. Eight weeks after the transplantation, radiographic, and hisological analysis of the recipient site was performed. Bone-like structures were observed in CT analysis (a and b). Histological analysis
revealed that the periodontal tissue was regenerated at the 2 mm lingual side from the buccal bone (c) (bar, 1 mm, Azan). Arrows indicate
the bottoms of the defect.
LITERATURE CITED
Al-Hezaimi K, Al-Askar M, Al-Fahad H, Al-Rasheed A, Al-Sourani N,
Griffin T, ONeill R, Javed F. 2012. Effect of enamel matrix derivative protein on the healing of standardized epithelial wounds: a histomorphometric analysis in vivo. Int Wound J 9:436441.
Anzai J, Kitamura M, Nozaki T, Nagayasu T, Terashima A, Asano
T, Murakami S. 2010. Effects of concomitant use of fibroblast
growth factor (FGF)22 with beta-tricalcium phosphate (betaTCP) on the beagle dog 1-wall periodontal defect model. Biochem
Biophys Res Commun 403:345350.
Axelsson P, Lindhe J. 1981. The significance of maintenance care in
the treatment of periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol 8:281
294.
Camelo M, Nevins ML, Schenk RK, Simion M, Rasperini G, Lynch
SE, Nevins M. 1998. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic evaluation of human periodontal defects treated with Bio-Oss and BioGide. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 18:321331.
Caplan AI, Correa D. 2011. The MSC: an injury drugstore. Cell
Stem Cell 9:1115.
Caton J, Nyman S, Zander H. 1980. Histometric evaluation of periodontal surgery. II. Connective tissue attachment levels after four
regenerative procedures. J Clin Periodontol 7:224231.
Chen FM, Shelton RM, Jin Y, Chapple IL. 2009. Localized delivery
of growth factors for periodontal tissue regeneration: role, strategies, and perspectives. Med Res Rev 29:472513.
Damien E, Revell PA. 2004. Coralline hydroxyapatite bone graft
substitute: a review of experimental studies and biomedical applications. J Appl Biomater Biomech 2:6573.
de Oliveira C, Watt R, Hamer M. 2010. Toothbrushing, inflammation, and risk of cardiovascular disease: results from Scottish
Health Survey. BMJ 340:c2451.
Ding G, Liu Y, Wang W, Wei F, Liu D, Fan Z, An Y, Zhang C, Wang
S. 2010. Allogeneic periodontal ligament stem cell therapy for
periodontitis in swine. Stem Cells 28:18291838.
Duan X, Tu Q, Zhang J, Ye J, Sommer C, Mostoslavsky G, Kaplan D,
Yang P, Chen J. 2011. Application of induced pluripotent stem (iPS)
cells in periodontal tissue regeneration. J Cell Physiol 226:150157.
Egusa H, Sonoyama W, Nishimura M, Atsuta I, Akiyama K. 2012.
Stem cells in dentistry-part I: stem cell sources. J Prosthodont
Res 56:151165.
Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Papanikolaou N, Coulthard P,
Worthington HV. 2009. Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain(R))
for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev CD003875.
Gay IC, Chen S, MacDougall M. 2007. Isolation and characterization of multipotent human periodontal ligament stem cells.
Orthod Craniofac Res 10:149160.
Giannobile WV, Hernandez RA, Finkelman RD, Ryan S, Kiritsy CP,
DAndrea M, Lynch SE. 1996. Comparative effects of plateletderived growth factor-BB and insulin-like growth factor-I, individually and in combination, on periodontal regeneration in Macaca
fascicularis. J Periodontal Res 31:301312.
Giannobile WV, Ryan S, Shih MS, Su DL, Kaplan PL, Chan TC.
1998. Recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 (OP-1) stimulates
periodontal wound healing in class III furcation defects. J Periodontol 69:129137.
23
24
IWATA ET AL.
25