Mechanobiology of bone and suture – Results from a pig model

Abstract

Structured Abstract Objective To compare the morphology and mechanical function of sutures in normal pigs and minipigs to those of Yucatan minipigs, a natural model for midfacial hypoplasia. Setting and Sample Population Research took place at the Department of Orthodontics at the University of Washington and used varying sample sizes of normal‐snouted pigs and Yucatan minipigs. Material and Methods Skulls and heads were examined for morphology of the nasofrontal suture using computed tomography and histology. Strain gauge recordings were made of sutural strain during mastication and during cyclic tensile loading of the nasofrontal suture. Results Sutures in Yucatans had narrower gaps than same‐age normal pigs. The nasofrontal suture was simpler in construction and had more active osteoblasts on the bone fronts in Yucatans. The sutural ligament was less well organized, and based on a small sample, masticatory strain appeared to be lower than in normal minipigs. However, sutures were not fused and showed similar strains in response to the cyclic loading procedure. Conclusion Midfacial hypoplasia in Yucatan pigs has the likely proximate cause of hyperossification. Yet prior to fusion, the sutures appear to be amenable to treatment that would promote their growth rate.

Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of cranial sutures – A novel approach to quantitative analysis

“…Morphological adaptations of sutures to applied loading has been noted in the literature, where sutures that are compressed in vivo typically exhibit higher levels of interdigitation than sutures that are tensed ( Herring and Ochareon, 2005 ; Markey et al, 2006 ). Researchers studying suture morphology are typically interested in exploring ex vivo properties of suture complexes ( Maloul et al, 2013 ; Jaslow, 1990 ; Radhakrishnan and Mao, 2004 ), in vivo suture loads and loading conditions ( Rafferty and Herring, 1999 ; Rafferty et al, 2019 ; Herring and Mucci, 1991 ), in vivo suture morphological adaptations ( Herring, 2008 ; Peptan et al, 2008 ; Soh et al, 2018 ; Sun et al, 2004 ), developing and improving clinical applications ( Guerrero-Vargas et al, 2019 ; Cohen, 1993 ; Mao et al, 2003 ; Bishara and Staley, 1987 ), or generating numerical and analytical modelling techniques involving suture complexity and mechanics ( Jasinoski et al, 2010 ; Jasinoski and Reddy, 2012 ; Maloul et al, 2014 ; Liu et al, 2017 ).…”

Evolutionary phenome-genome analysis of cranial suture closure in mammals

“…we modeled the mutual causation between sutures due to their development (Koyabu et al, 2014; 3 3 7 Rager et al, 2014), the effect of hard diet on sutures due to the stress involving in chewing 3 3 8 (Herring, 2008;Rafferty et al, 2019;Sun et al, 2004), and the effect of brain size on sutures due to 3 3 9 the influence of the brain on the growth of the bones of the vault and the maintenance of sutures 3 4 0 (Richtsmeier, 2018;Richtsmeier et al, 2006;Richtsmeier & Flaherty, 2013). Finally, we included 3 4 1 the effect of diet quality on brain size as an indirect link on sutures (Aiello & Wheeler, 1995;Allen 3 4 2 & Kay, 2012).…”