The role of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and type beta transforming growth factot beta (TGF beta1, beta2 and beta3) during rat craniofacial development

Growth factors seem to be part of a complex cellular signalling language, in which individual growth factors are the equivalents of the letters that compose words. According to this analogy, informational content lies, not in an individual growth factor, but in the entire set of growth factors and others signals to which a cell is exposed. The ways in which growth factors exert their combinatorial effects are becoming clearer as the molecular mechanisms of growth factors actions are being investigated. A number of related extracellular signalling molecules that play widespread roles in regulating development in both invertebrates and vertebrates constitute the Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF) and type beta Transforming Growth Factor ((TGF beta). The latest research literature about the role and fate of these Growth factors and their influence in the craniofacial bone growth ad development is reviewed

The role of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and type beta transforming growth factot beta (TGF beta1, beta2 and beta3) during rat craniofacial development

Growth factors seem to be part of a complex cellular signalling language, in which individual growth factors are the equivalents of the letters that compose words. According to this analogy, informational content lies, not in an individual growth factor, but in the entire set of growth factors and others signals to which a cell is exposed. The ways in which growth factors exert their combinatorial effects are becoming clearer as the molecular mechanisms of growth factors actions are being investigated. A number of related extracellular signalling molecules that play widespread roles in regulating development in both invertebrates and vertebrates constitute the Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF) and type beta Transforming Growth Factor ((TGF beta). The latest research literature about the role and fate of these Growth factors and their influence in the craniofacial bone growth ad development is reviewed

Essential role of the N-terminal region of TFII-I in viability and behavior

Background: GTF2I codes for a general intrinsic transcription factor and calcium channel regulator TFII-I, with high and ubiquitous expression, and a strong candidate for involvement in the morphological and neuro-developmental anomalies of the Williams-Beuren syndrome (WBS). WBS is a genetic disorder due to a recurring deletion of about 1,55-1,83 Mb containing 25-28 genes in chromosome band 7q11.23 including GTF2I. Completed homozygous loss of either the Gtf2i or Gtf2ird1 function in mice provided additional evidence for the involvement of both genes in the craniofacial and cognitive phenotype. Unfortunately nothing is now about the behavioral characterization of heterozygous mice. Methods: By gene targeting we have generated a mutant mice with a deletion of the first 140 amino-acids of TFII-I. mRNA and protein expression analysis were used to document the effect of the study deletion. We performed behavioral characterization of heterozygous mutant mice to document in vivo implications of TFII-I in the cognitive profile of WBS patients. Results: Homozygous and heterozygous mutant mice exhibit craniofacial alterations, most clearly represented in homozygous condition. Behavioral test demonstrate that heterozygous mutant mice exhibit some neurobehavioral alterations and hyperacusis or odynacusis that could be associated with specific features of WBS phenotype. Homozygous mutant mice present highly compromised embryonic viability and fertility. Regarding cellular model, we documented a retarded growth in heterozygous MEFs respect to homozygous or wild-type MEFs. Conclusion: Our data confirm that, although additive effects of haploinsufficiency at several genes may contribute to the full craniofacial or neurocognitive features of WBS, correct expression of GTF2I is one of the main players. In addition, these findings show that the deletion of the fist 140 amino-acids of TFII-I altered it correct function leading to a clear phenotype, at both levels, at the cellular model and at the in vivo model.

Orofacial pain of cardiac origin: review literature and clinical cases

The most common types of orofacial pain originate at the dental or periodontal level or in the musculoskeletal structures. However, the patient may present pain in this region even though the source is located elsewhere in the body. One possible source of heterotopic pain is of cardiac origin. Objectives: Report two cases of orofacial pain of cardiac origin and review the clinical cases described in the literature. Study Design: Description of clinical cases and review of clinical cases. Results and conclusions: Nine cases of atypical pain of cardiac origin are recorded, which include 5 females and 4 males. In craniofacial structures, pain of cardiac origin is usually bilateral. At the craniofacial level, the most frequent location described is in the throat and jaw. Pain of cardiac origin is considered atypical due to its location, although roughly 10% of the cases of cardiac ischemia manifest primarily in craniofacial structures. Finally, the differential diagnosis of pain of odontogenic origin must be taken into account with pain of non-odontogenic origin (muscle, psychogenic, neuronal, cardiac, sinus and neurovascular pain) in order to avoid diagnostic errors in the dental practice as well as unnecessary treatments.

Orofacial pain of cardiac origin, serial of clinical cases

Objective: To determine the clinical characteristics of the orofacial pain of cardiac origin in patients visited when doing a treadmill exercise test, at the cardiology service of the Can Ruti Hospital in Badalona (Barcelona, Spain). Study design: The sample of that study included thirty patients visiteding when doing a treadmill exercise test, at the cardiology service. The questionnaire has been asked to a sample of 30 patients. Results: Eleven of the 30 patients included in this study presented craniofacial pain before or during the cardiac seizure. The location of the pain was bilateral, non-irradiated at the mandible in all cases. The intensity of the pain was from slight to severe. The frequency of the appearance of the pain was paroxysmal in 8 cases and constant in three cases, and the duration was from a few hours to a maximum of 14 days. Discussion: The cardiac pain in craniofacial structures is usually bilateral, compared to odontogenic pain which is always unilateral. The pain of cardiac origin is considered atypical because of its location, but about the 10 % of the cases, the cardiac ischemia has its primary manifestation in orofacial structures. Conclusions: Eleven patients referred a bilateral non-irradiated mandibular pain, with intensity from slight to severe, and with a paroxystic frequency in eight cases and a constant frequency in three cases. Just one patient referred pain during the treadmill exercise test. In all cases the pain disappeared after the cardiac surgery or the administration of vasodilators.