Division of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Institute of Clinical Sciences, School of Dentistry, Birmingham, UK.
Int Endod J. 2019 Mar;52(3):261-266. doi: 10.1111/iej.13064.
A thorough understanding of the biology of the dentine-pulp complex is essential to underpin new treatment approaches and maximize clinical impact for regenerative endodontics and minimally invasive vital pulp treatment (VPT) strategies. Following traumatic and carious injury to dentine-pulp, a complex interplay between infection, inflammation and the host defence responses will occur, which is critical to tissue outcomes. Diagnostic procedures aim to inform treatment planning; however, these remain clinically subjective and have considerable limitations. As a consequence, significant effort has focussed on identification of diagnostic biomarkers, although these are also problematic due to difficulties in identifying appropriate diagnostic fluid sources and selecting reproducible biomarkers. This is further compounded by the link between inflammation and repair as many of the molecules involved exhibit significant multifunctionality. The tertiary dentine formed in response to dental injury has been purposefully termed reactionary and reparative dentine to enable focus on associated biological processes. Whilst reactionary dentine produced in response to milder injury is generated from surviving primary odontoblasts, reparative dentine, in response to more intense injury, requires the differentiation of new odontoblast-like cells derived from progenitor/stem cells recruited to the injury site. These two diverse processes result in very different outcomes in terms of the tertiary dentine produced and reflect the intensity rather than specific nature (nonexposure versus exposure) of the injury. The subsequent identification of the odontoblast-like cell phenotype remains challenging due to lack of unique molecular or morphological markers. Furthermore, the cells ultimately lining the newly deposited dentine provide only a snapshot of events. The specific source and plasticity of the progenitor cells giving rise to the odontoblast-like cell phenotype are also of significant debate. It is likely that improved characterization of tertiary dentine may better clarify the influence of cell derivation for odontoblast-like cells and their diversity. The field of regenerative endodontics offers exciting new treatment opportunities, and to maximize outcomes, we propose that the term regenerative endodontics should embrace the repair, replacement and regeneration of dentine-pulp.
深入了解牙本质-牙髓复合体的生物学特性对于支持新的治疗方法和最大限度地提高再生牙髓治疗和微创有活力牙髓治疗(VPT)策略的临床效果至关重要。在牙本质-牙髓受到创伤和龋损后,感染、炎症和宿主防御反应之间将发生复杂的相互作用,这对组织结局至关重要。诊断程序旨在为治疗计划提供信息;然而,这些仍然具有临床主观性,并且存在相当大的局限性。因此,人们已经将大量精力集中在鉴定诊断生物标志物上,尽管由于难以确定适当的诊断液源和选择可重复的生物标志物,这些生物标志物也存在问题。炎症和修复之间的联系进一步加剧了这种情况,因为许多涉及的分子表现出显著的多功能性。为了能够关注相关的生物学过程,人们特意将对牙齿损伤做出反应形成的继发性牙本质称为反应性牙本质和修复性牙本质。虽然对轻度损伤做出反应产生的反应性牙本质是由存活的原发性成牙本质细胞产生的,但对更强烈的损伤做出反应的修复性牙本质需要分化为从损伤部位募集而来的祖细胞/干细胞衍生的新成牙本质细胞样细胞。这两个不同的过程在产生的第三性牙本质方面产生了非常不同的结果,并反映了损伤的强度而不是特定性质(无暴露与暴露)。由于缺乏独特的分子或形态学标志物,随后鉴定成牙本质细胞样细胞表型仍然具有挑战性。此外,最终排列在新沉积牙本质上的细胞仅提供了事件的快照。产生成牙本质细胞样细胞的祖细胞的具体来源和可塑性也存在很大争议。对第三性牙本质的特征进行更好的描述,可能会更好地阐明细胞起源对成牙本质细胞样细胞及其多样性的影响。再生牙髓治疗领域提供了令人兴奋的新治疗机会,为了最大限度地提高治疗效果,我们建议将再生牙髓治疗一词纳入牙髓-牙本质的修复、替代和再生。