Local application of zoledronate for maximum anchorage during space closure.

INTRODUCTION: Orthodontists have used various compliance-dependent physical means such as headgears and intraoral appliances to prevent anchorage loss. The aim of this study was to determine whether 1 local application of the bisphosphonate zoledronate could be used to prevent anchorage loss during extraction space closure in rats. METHODS: Thirty rats had their maxillary left first molars extracted and their maxillary left second molars protracted into the extraction space with a 10-g nickel-titanium closing coil for 21 days. Fifteen control rats received a local injection of phosphate-buffered saline solution, and 15 experimental rats received 16 µg of the bisphosphonate zoledronate. Bisphosphonate was also delivered directly into the extraction site and left undisturbed for 5 minutes. Cephalograms and incremental thickness gauges were used to measure tooth movements. Tissues were analyzed by microcomputed tomography and histology. RESULTS: The control group demonstrated significant (P <0.05) tooth movements throughout the 21-day period. They showed significantly greater tooth movements than the experimental group beginning in the second week. The experimental group showed no significant tooth movement after the first week. The microcomputed tomography and histologic observations showed significant bone loss in the extraction sites and around the second molars of the controls. In contrast, the experimental group had bone preservation and bone fill. There was no evidence of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis in any sample. CONCLUSIONS: A single small, locally applied dose of zoledronate provided maximum anchorage and prevented significant bone loss.

Membranes, minerals, and proteins of developing vertebrate enamel.

Developing tooth enamel is formed as organized mineral in a specialized protein matrix. In order to analyze patterns of enamel mineralization and enamel protein expression in species representative of the main extant vertebrate lineages, we investigated developing teeth in a chondrichthyan, the horn shark, a teleost, the guppy, a urodele amphibian, the Mexican axolotl, an anuran amphibian, the leopard frog, two lepidosauria, a gecko and an iguana, and two mammals, a marsupial, the South American short-tailed gray opossum, and the house mouse. Electron microscopic analysis documented the presence of a distinct basal lamina in all species investigated. Subsequent stages of enamel biomineralization featured highly organized long and parallel enamel crystals in mammals, lepidosaurians, the frog, and the shark, while amorphous mineral deposits and/or randomly oriented crystals were observed in the guppy and the axolotl. In situ hybridization using a full-length mouse probe for amelogenin mRNA resulted in amelogenin specific signals in mouse, opossum, gecko, frog, axolotl, and shark. Using immunohistochemistry, amelogenin and tuftelin enamel proteins were detected in the enamel organ of many species investigated, but tuftelin epitopes were also found in other tissues. The anti-M179 antibody, however, did not react with the guppy and axolotl enameloid matrix. We conclude that basic features of vertebrate enamel/enameloid formation such as the presence of enamel proteins or the mineral deposition along the dentin-enamel junction were highly conserved in vertebrates. There were also differences in terms of enamel protein distribution and mineral organization between the vertebrates lineages. Our findings indicated a correlation between the presence of amelogenins and the presence of long and parallel hydroxyapatite crystals in tetrapods and shark.

Conservation and variation in enamel protein distribution during vertebrate tooth development.

Vertebrate enamel formation is a unique synthesis of the function of highly specialized enamel proteins and their effect on the growth and organization of apatite crystals. Among tetrapods, the physical structure of enamel is highly conserved, while there is a greater variety of enameloid tooth coverings in fish. In the present study, we postulated that in enamel microstructures of similar organization, the principle components of the enamel protein matrix would have to be highly conserved. In order to identify the enamel proteins that might be most highly conserved and thus potentially most essential to the process of mammalian enamel formation, we used immunoscreening with enamel protein antibodies as a means to assay for degrees of homology to mammalian enamel proteins. Enamel preparations from mouse, gecko, frog, lungfish, and shark were screened with mammalian enamel protein antibodies, including amelogenin, enamelin, tuftelin, MMP20, and EMSP1. Our results demonstrated that amelogenin was the most highly conserved enamel protein associated with the enamel organ, enamelin featured a distinct presence in shark enameloid but was also present in the enamel organ of other species, while the other enamel proteins, tuftelin, MMP20, and EMSP1, were detected in both in the enamel organ and in other tissues of all species investigated. We thus conclude that the investigated enamel proteins, amelogenin, enamelin, tuftelin, MMP20, and EMSP1, were highly conserved in a variety of vertebrate species. We speculate that there might be a unique correlation between amelogenin-rich tetrapod and lungfish enamel with long and parallel crystals and enamelin-rich basal vertebrate enameloid with diverse patterns of crystal organization.