4.5 Article

In vivo generation of dental pulp-like tissue by using dental pulp stem cells, dentin matrix protein 1 transplantation in mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
Volume 34, Issue 4, Pages 421-426

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.02.005

Keywords

dental pulp stem cells; dentin matrix protein; perforation repair; regenerative endodontics; tissue engineering

Funding

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [R01 DE011657, R56 DE011657, DE 11657, R01 DE011657-11] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The presence of a perforation is known to significantly compromise the outcome of endodontic treatment. One potential use of regenerative endodontic therapy might be the repair of root canal perforations. In addition to nutrients and systemic in situ interactions, the 3 main components believed to be essential for tissue regeneration are stem cells, scaffold, and growth factors. This study investigated the role of each component of the tissue engineering triad in the organization and differentiation of dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) in a simulated furcal perforation site by using a mouse model. Collagen served as the scaffold, and dentin matrix protein 1 (DMP1) was the growth factor. Materials were placed in simulated perforation sites in dentin slices. Mineral trioxide aggregate was the control repair material. At 6 weeks, the animals were killed, and the perforation sites were evaluated by light microscopy and histologic staining. Organization of newly derived pulp tissue was seen in the group containing the triad of DPSCs, a collagen scaffold, and DMP1. The other 4 groups did not demonstrate any apparent tissue organization. Under the conditions of the present study, it might be concluded that the triad of DPSCs, a collagen scaffold, and DMP1 can induce an organized matrix formation similar to that of pulpal tissue, which might lead to hard tissue formation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available