No abstract

SummaryPost-natal skeletal stem cells expressing PRX1 (pnPRX1+) have been identified in the calvaria and in the axial skeleton. Here we characterize the location and functional capacity of the calvarial pnPRX1+ cells. We found that pnPRX1+ reside exclusively in the calvarial suture niche and decrease in number with age. They are distinct from preosteoblasts and osteoblasts of the sutures, respond to WNT signaling in vitro and in vivo by differentiating into osteoblasts, and, upon heterotopic transplantation, are able to regenerate bone. Diphtheria toxin A (DTA)-mediated lineage ablation of pnPRX1+ cells and suturectomy perturb regeneration of calvarial bone defects and confirm that pnPRX1+ cells of the sutures are required for bone regeneration. Orthotopic transplantation of sutures with traceable pnPRX1+ cells into wild-type animals shows that pnPRX1+ cells of the suture contribute to calvarial bone defect regeneration. DTA-mediated lineage ablation of pnPRX1+ does not, however, interfere with calvarial development.

Periodontal diseases are highly prevalent and are linked to several systemic diseases. The goal of periodontal treatment is to halt the progression of the disease and regenerate the damaged tissue. However, achieving complete and functional periodontal regeneration is challenging because the periodontium is a complex apparatus composed of different tissues, including bone, cementum, and periodontal ligament. Stem cell-based regenerative therapy may represent an effective therapeutic tool for periodontal regeneration due to their plasticity and ability to differentiate into different cell lineages. This review presents and critically analyzes the available information on stem cell-based therapy for the regeneration of periodontal tissues and suggests new avenues for the development of more effective therapeutic protocols.

Background The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy of the early dental implant placement protocol with immediate and delayed dental implant placement protocols. Methods An electronic and manual search of literature was made to identify clinical studies comparing early implant placement with immediate or delayed placement. Data from the included studies were pooled and quantitative analyses were performed for the implant outcomes reported as the number of failed implants (primary outcome variable) and for changes in peri‐implant marginal bone level, peri‐implant probing depth, and peri‐implant soft tissue level (secondary outcome variables). Results Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Significant difference in risk of implant failure was found neither between the early and immediate placement protocols (risk difference = −0.018; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.06, 0.025; P = 0.416) nor between early and delayed placement protocols (risk difference = −0.008; 95% CI = –0.044, 0.028; P = 0.670). Pooled data of changes in peri‐implant marginal bone level demonstrated significantly less marginal bone loss for implants placed using the early placement protocol compared with those placed in fresh extraction sockets (P = 0.001; weighted mean difference = −0.14 mm; 95% CI = −0.22, −0.05). No significant differences were found between the protocols for the other variables. Conclusions The available evidence supports the clinical efficacy of the early implant placement protocol. Present findings indicate that the early implant placement protocol results in implant outcomes similar to immediate and delayed placement protocols and a superior stability of peri‐implant hard tissue compared with immediate implant placement.