<b>Response to light compressive force in human cementoblasts </b><i><b>in </b></i><i><b>vitro </b></i>

Abstract

The objective of this study is to investigate the responses of human cementoblasts to light compressive force in vitro. A human cementoblast cell line (HCEM) was loaded for 12 h by mounting coverslips (0.25 gf/cm 2 ). The coverslips were removed and the cells were cultured for up to 21 days. Cells without glass loading were used as controls. Cell growth, morphological changes, and the mRNA expression of RUNX2, ALP, WNT5A and SPON1 were investigated. No significant differences were observed in cell numbers between the compressed group and control group. Morphology of the compressed cells was slightly flattened on day 0; however, no indications of cell death were detected. Expression of differentiation markers including RUNX2, ALP and WNT5A was significantly lower in the compressed group (0.7, 0.75 and 0.75-fold respectively, P < 0.05) than in the control group on day 7. The expression levels of SPON1, a differentiation marker of cementoblasts, were higher on days 7 and 14 than on day 0, but were lower in the compressed group than in the control group (P < 0.01). These results suggest that light compressive force does not affect cell growth and morphology, but restrains higher expression of cementogenic differentiation markers in human cementoblasts in vitro.

Alkaline extracellular conditions promote the proliferation and mineralization of a human cementoblast cell line

“…, Matsunaga et al . ). In the present study, the results of alizarin red staining showed that mineralization increased in the high pH medium compared to the pH 7.6 medium and was inhibited by the TRPA1 antagonist HC030031.…”

Long noncoding RNA expression profile of mouse cementoblasts under compressive force

“…The compressive forces applied ranged from 0.25 g/cm 2 to 3 g/cm 2 in previous studies. 5,13 Since root resorption occurs in orthodontic treatment with light force as well, the response of cementoblasts under appropriate compressive force instead of heavy force was investigated. To avoid pathological damage of cementoblasts, the force magnitude was set at 1.5 g/ cm 2 for 8 hours, and the cell viability and apoptosis assays confirmed the absence of significant increased apoptosis.…”

“…Cementogenesis was inhibited under compression as indicated by ALP staining and cementoblast-related gene expression, consistent with previous studies. 3,5 External root resorption results from abnormal cementum remodeling. Thus, compression decreases cementoblastic function and subsequently induces root resorption.…”

“…4 Similarly, ALP, OPG, and RANKL are expressed inconsistently in cementoblasts under mechanical force. [5][6][7][8] The process of transduction of mechanical compression in cementoblasts may be affected epigenetically, but this has rarely been reported.…”

Mechanical Loading on Cementoblasts: A Mini Review

“…Lastly, OPN is proven as being decreased after up to 24 hours in the same compressive conditions 62 . To conclude, cementogenesis is strongly affected by compressive forces 66 67 whereby it remains to be elucidated if there are tissue-specific molecular mechanisms involved in orthodontic root repair 6 . Nevertheless, these results potentially provide new evidence on the mechanism of pathogenesis of root resorption and may offer molecular targets for the preventive treatment of this undesirable outcome 62 .…”