The function of Bmps and Runx2 in normal tooth development and in the pathogenesis of cleidocranial dysplasia

The development of many embryonic organs is regulated by reciprocal and sequential epithelial-mesenchymal interactions. These interactions are mediated by conserved signaling pathways that are reiteratively used. Cleidocranial dysplasia (CCD) is a congenital syndrome where both bone and tooth development is affected. The syndrome is characterized by short stature, abnormal clavicles, general bone dysplasia, and supernumerary teeth. CCD is caused by mutations in RUNX2, a transcription factor that is a key regulator of osteoblast differentiation and bone formation. The first aim of this study was to analyse the expression of a family of key signal molecules, Bone morphogenetic protein (Bmp) at different stages of tooth development. Bmps have a variety of functions and they were originally discovered as signals inducing ectopic bone formation. We performed a comparative in situ hybridisation analysis of the mRNA expression of Bmp2-7 from initiation of tooth development to differentiation of dental hard tissues. The expression patterns indicated that the Bmps signal between the epithelial and mesenchymal tissues during initiation and morphogenesis of tooth development, as well as during the differentiation of odontoblasts and ameloblasts. Furthermore, they are also part of the signalling networks whereby the enamel knot regulates the patterning of tooth cusps. The second aim was to study the role of Runx2 during tooth development and thereby to gain better understanding of the pathogenesis of the tooth phenotype in CCD. We analysed the tooth phenotype of Runx2 knockout mice and examined the patterns and regulation of Runx2 gene expression.. The teeth of wild-type and Runx2 mutant mice were compared by several methods including in situ hybridisation, tissue culture, bead implantation experiments, and epithelial-mesenchymal recombination studies. Phenotypic analysis of Runx2 -/- mutant tooth development showed that teeth failed to advance beyond the bud stage. Runx2 expression was restricted to dental mesenchyme between the bud and early bell stages of tooth development and it was regulated by epithelial signals, in particular Fgfs. We searched for downstream targets of Runx2 by comparative in situ hybridisation analysis. The expression of Fgf3 was downregulated in the mesenchyme of Runx2 -/- teeth. Shh expression was absent from the enamel knot in the lower molars of Runx2 -/- and reduced in the upper molars. In conclusion, these studies showed that Runx2 regulates key epithelial-mesenchymal interactions that control advancing tooth morphogenesis and histodifferentiation of the epithelial enamel organ. In addition, in the upper molars of Runx2 mutants extra buddings occured at the palatal side of the tooth bud. We suggest that Runx2 acts as an inhibitor of successional tooth formation by preventing advancing development of the buds. Accordingly, we propose that RUNX2 haploinsuffiency in humans causes incomplete inhibition of successional tooth formation and as a result supernumerary teeth.

Evaluation of the Biocompatibility of Poly (ortho ester), Copolymer of ε-caprolactone/D,L-lactide and the Composite of Copolymer of ε-caprolactone/D,L-lactide and Tricalciumphosphate as Bone Filling Material

The purpose of this series of studies was to evaluate the biocompatibility of poly (ortho) ester (POE), copolymer of ε-caprolactone and D,L-lactide [P (ε-CL/DL-LA)] and the composite of P(ε-CL/DL-LA) and tricalciumphosphate (TCP) as bone filling material in bone defects. Tissue reactions and resorption times of two solid POE-implants (POE 140 and POE 46) with different methods of sterilization (gamma- and ethylene oxide sterilization), P(ε-CL/DL-LA)(40/60 w/w) in paste form and 50/50 w/w composite of 40/60 w/w P(ε-CL/DL-LA) and TCP and 27/73 w/w composite of 60/40 w/w P(ε-CL/DL-LA) and TCP were examined in experimental animals. The follow-up times were from one week to 52 weeks. The bone samples were evaluated histologically and the soft tissue samples histologically, immunohistochemically and electronmicroscopically. The results showed that the resorption time of gamma sterilized POE 140 was eight weeks and ethylene oxide sterilized POE 140 13 weeks in bone. The resorption time of POE 46 was more than 24 weeks. The gamma sterilized rods started to erode from the surface faster than ethylene oxide sterilized rods for both POEs. Inflammation in bone was from slight to moderate with POE 140 and moderate with POE 46. No highly fluorescent layer of tenascin or fibronectin was found in the soft tissue. Bone healing at the sites of implantation was slower than at control sites with the copolymer in small bone defects. The resorption time for the copolymer was over one year. Inflammation in bone was mostly moderate. Bone healing at the sites of implantation was also slower than at the control sites with the composite in small and large mandibular bone defects. Bone formation had ceased at both sites by the end of follow-up in large mandibular bone defects. The ultrastructure of the connective tissue was normal during the period of observation. It can be concluded that the method of sterilization influenced the resorption time of both POEs. Gamma sterilized POE 140 could have been suitable material for filling small bone defects, whereas the degradation times of solid EO-sterilized POE 140 and POE 46 were too slow to be considered as bone filling material. Solid material is difficult to contour, which can be considered as a disadvantage. The composites were excellent to handle, but the degradation time of the polymer and the composites were too slow. Therefore, the copolymer and the composite can not be recommended as bone filling material.