4.3 Article

Expression of substance P, calcitonin gene-related peptide, β-endorphin and methionine-enkephalin in human dental pulp tissue after orthodontic intrusion A pilot study

期刊

ANGLE ORTHODONTIST
卷 84, 期 3, 页码 521-526

出版社

E H ANGLE EDUCATION RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC
DOI: 10.2319/060313-423.1

关键词

Neurogenic inflammation; Endogenous opioid system; Substance P; Calcitonin gene-related peptide; Methionine-enkephalin; beta-endorphin

资金

  1. [PIFI 2012]
  2. [C12-FAI-03-93.93]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the levels of two sensory neuropeptides (substance P [SP] and calcitonin gene-related peptide [CGRP]) and two endogenous opioids (methionine-enkephalin [Met-Enk] and beta-endorphin [beta-End]) in dental pulp tissue samples subjected to controlled orthodontic intrusive forces. Materials and Methods: Sixteen healthy premolars were selected from eight patients who were undergoing extraction for orthodontic purposes. Eight were randomly used as controls, and the other eight were assigned to an experimental group (controlled orthodontic intrusive forces applied for 24 hours). After this period, teeth were extracted, and pulp samples were obtained. All samples were processed to quantify the expression levels of SP, CGRP, Met-Enk, and beta-End using commercial radioimmunoassay kits. Results: All samples exhibited basal levels of both neuropeptides and endogenous opioids. After 24 hours of the intrusive stimulus, all patients reported a tolerable discomfort localized at the involved premolar. Only SP was significantly increased (P < .05). For the other molecules, no statistically significant differences were observed (P > .05); however, they expressed important increasing trends. Conclusions: The expression levels of SP and CGRP in dental pulp samples from the experimental group support the positive correlation between the symptomatic clinical scenario and increased expression levels of neuropeptides, clarifying the role of neurogenic inflammation in early injury response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据