Rank Protein Immunolabeling during Bone-Implant Interface Healing Process

Francisley Ávila Souza,Eloá Rodrigues Luvizuto,Roberta Okamoto,Paulo Sérgio Perri De Carvalho,Thallita Pereira Queiroz,Renato Sussumu Nishioka,Idelmo Rangel Garcia-Jr

doi:10.1155/2010/513461

Francisley Ávila Souza, Eloá Rodrigues Luvizuto + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/513461

Copy DOI

Abstract

The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the expression of RANK protein during bone-healing process around machined surface implants. Twenty male Wistar rats, 90 days old, after having had a 2 mm diameter and 6 mm long implant inserted in their right tibias, were evaluated at 7, 14, 21, and 42 days after healing. After obtaining the histological samples, slides were subjected to RANK immunostaining reaction. Results were quantitatively evaluated. Results. Immunolabeling analysis showed expressions of RANK in osteoclast and osteoblast lineage cells. The statistical analysis showed an increase in the expression of RANK in osteoblasts at 7 postoperative days and a gradual decrease during the chronology of the healing process demonstrated by mild cellular activity in the final stage (P < .05). Conclusion. RANK immunolabeling was observed especially in osteoclast and osteoblast cells in primary bone during the initial periods of bone-healing/implant interface.

Highlights

Of the significant advances in dentistry during the twentieth century, unquestionably none has extended the treatment horizons more than the successful use of osseointegrated implants
The initial step in the bone-healing process starts with the migration of osteogenic cells, derived from the medullary bone layer, including undifferentiated mesenchymal cells, osteocytes, and osteoblasts, directly to a framework supported by blood a clot [5, 6]
The imunolabelings taken into consideration were those observed in the osteoclasts, osteoblasts, and osteocytes in neoformed bone, around the implant

Summary

Introduction

Of the significant advances in dentistry during the twentieth century, unquestionably none has extended the treatment horizons more than the successful use of osseointegrated implants. Branemark et al [2] have defined osseointegration as a direct structural and functional connection between ordinary healthy bone and the implant surface, as seen at the level of optical microscopy, producing stability and allowing the structure to support the masticatory forces. The process of bone remodeling, which involves many cellular steps and is not yet well understood, has been considered a repetition of the osteogenic lineage response that occurs in the fetus during the developmental phases [4]. There is no evidence of complete contact between bone and the titanium surface, but the aspect considered is the greater or lesser amount of connective tissue, without clinical failure or fault of the implant [8]. In machined-surface implants, there is a larger quantity of conjunctive tissue in the initial stages of the repair process, when compared with porous-surface implants

Objectives

Methods

Conclusion