OBJECTIVE: To quantify remodeling in the bone surrounding fully erupted primary teeth and to compare bone remodeling in the primary and permanent dentitions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two bone sections were obtained bilaterally from the maxilla and mandible of the primary molar region of approximately 5-month-old male beagle dogs. Histomorphometric methods were used to estimate the osteonal remodeling in the alveolar and basal regions of the tooth supporting bone. The following variables were calculated: mineral apposition rate (MAR, µm/d), mineralizing surface/bone surface (MS/BS, %), bone formation rate (BFR, %/y), and erosion surface/bone surface (ES/BS, %). Comparisons were made between jaws (maxilla vs mandible) and bone types (alveolar vs basal), and data analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey-Kramer tests. Remodeling (BFR) surrounding primary teeth was compared to existing data from bone surrounding permanent teeth. RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation BFR values (%/y) were as follows: mandibular alveolar, 44.10 (±26.89); maxillary alveolar, 3.54 (±3.57); mandibular basal, 22.65 (±14.65); and maxillary basal, 12.33 (±7.11). The mandibular BFR was significantly (P < .05) higher than the maxillary bone. The BFR of the alveolar bone of primary teeth was not significantly (P = .48) different from the alveolar bone supporting permanent teeth. CONCLUSIONS: The remodeling rate of alveolar bone in skeletally immature dogs was greater in the mandible than in the maxilla and remained unaltered between primary and permanent dentitions.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify remodeling in the bone surrounding fully erupted primary teeth and to compare bone remodeling in the primary and permanent dentitions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two bone sections were obtained bilaterally from the maxilla and mandible of the primary molar region of approximately 5-month-old male beagle dogs. Histomorphometric methods were used to estimate the osteonal remodeling in the alveolar and basal regions of the tooth supporting bone. The following variables were calculated: mineral apposition rate (MAR, µm/d), mineralizing surface/bone surface (MS/BS, %), bone formation rate (BFR, %/y), and erosion surface/bone surface (ES/BS, %). Comparisons were made between jaws (maxilla vs mandible) and bone types (alveolar vs basal), and data analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey-Kramer tests. Remodeling (BFR) surrounding primary teeth was compared to existing data from bone surrounding permanent teeth. RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation BFR values (%/y) were as follows: mandibular alveolar, 44.10 (±26.89); maxillary alveolar, 3.54 (±3.57); mandibular basal, 22.65 (±14.65); and maxillary basal, 12.33 (±7.11). The mandibular BFR was significantly (P < .05) higher than the maxillary bone. The BFR of the alveolar bone of primary teeth was not significantly (P = .48) different from the alveolar bone supporting permanent teeth. CONCLUSIONS: The remodeling rate of alveolar bone in skeletally immature dogs was greater in the mandible than in the maxilla and remained unaltered between primary and permanent dentitions.
Authors: A M Parfitt; M K Drezner; F H Glorieux; J A Kanis; H Malluche; P J Meunier; S M Ott; R R Recker Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 1987-12 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Hechang Huang; Michael Richards; Tamer Bedair; Henry W Fields; J Martin Palomo; William M Johnston; Do-Gyoon Kim Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 3.573