Igor Matić

Preosteocytes/Osteocytes Have the Potential to Dedifferentiate Becoming a Source of Osteoblasts

Presently there is no clear evidence for the ability of mature osteogenic lineage cells to dedifferentiate. In order to identify and trace mature osteogenic lineage cells, we have utilized transgenic mouse models in which the dentin matrix protein 1 (Dmp1) promoter drives expression of GFP (active marker) or Cre recombinase (historic label) in preosteocytes/osteocytes. In long bone chip outgrowth cultures, in which cells on the bone surface were enzymatically removed, cells with previous activity of the Dmp1 promoter migrated onto plastic and down-regulated Dmp1-GFP expression. Dmp1Cre-labeled cells from these cultures had the potential to re-differentiate into the osteogenic lineage, while the negative population showed evidence of adipogenesis. We observed numerous Dmp1Cre-labeled osteoblasts on the surface of bone chips following their in vivo transplantation. Our data indicate that cells embedded in bone matrix are motile, and once given access to the extra bony milieu will migrate out of their lacunae. This population of cells is phenotypically and functionally heterogeneous in vitro. Once the preosteocytes/osteocytes leave lacunae, they can dedifferentiate, potentially providing an additional source of functional osteoblasts.

Quiescent Bone Lining Cells Are a Major Source of Osteoblasts During Adulthood.

The in vivo origin of bone‐producing osteoblasts is not fully defined. Skeletal stem cells, a population of mesenchymal stem cells resident in the bone marrow compartment, are thought to act as osteoprogenitors during growth and adulthood. Quiescent bone lining cells (BLCs) have been suggested as a population capable of activation into mature osteoblasts. These cells were defined by location and their morphology and studies addressing their significance have been hampered by their inaccessibility, and lack of markers that would allow for their identification and tracing. Using lineage tracing models, we have observed labeled osteoblasts at time points extending beyond the reported lifespan for this cell type, suggesting continuous reactivation of BLCs. BLCs also make a major contribution to bone formation after osteoblast ablation, which includes the ability to proliferate. In contrast, mesenchymal progenitors labeled by Gremlin1 or alpha smooth muscle actin do not contribute to bone formation in this setting. BLC activation is inhibited by glucocorticoids, which represent a well‐established cause of osteoporosis. BLCs express cell surface markers characteristic of mesenchymal stem/progenitors that are largely absent in osteoblasts including Sca1 and Leptin Receptor. BLCs also show different gene expression profiles to osteoblasts, including elevated expression of Mmp13, and osteoclast regulators RANKL and macrophage colony stimulating factor, and retain osteogenic potential upon transplantation. Our findings provide evidence that bone lining cells represent a major source of osteoblasts during adulthood. Stem Cells 2016;34:2930–2942

The effect of two different bracket types on the salivary levels of S mutans and S sobrinus in the early phase of orthodontic treatment

OBJECTIVE To determine the difference in the levels of Streptococcus mutans and S sobrinus in stimulated saliva in orthodontic patients with different bracket types (stainless steel and esthetic brackets) using polymerase chain reaction and cultivation method. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-two patients, aged 13 to 30 years, were selected following these criteria: 1) orthodontic treatment indication, 2) systemic health, and 3) no tobacco and antibiotic consummation for three months prior to the commencement of the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the bracket type; 16 patients formed the conventional bracket group (stainless steel brackets), and 16 patients formed the esthetic bracket group (plastic brackets). The levels of S mutans and S sobrinus in stimulated whole saliva samples were collected prior to fixed orthodontic appliance placement (T1) and 12 weeks after placement (T2), as were the Decayed, Missing, and Filled Surface Index (DMFS) and Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S). Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, and chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS Statistical analysis (chi-square test) showed no difference in S mutans and S sobrinus counts among patients with different brackets at either T1 or T2. There was no difference in total bacteria counts after fixed orthodontic appliance placement. CONCLUSION The number of colony-forming units of S mutans and S sobrinus in stimulated saliva samples does not seem to be significantly different between patients with stainless steel brackets and patients with plastic brackets.

Osteogenic potential of alpha smooth muscle actin expressing muscle resident progenitor cells.

Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a pathological process where bone forms in connective tissues such as skeletal muscle. Previous studies have suggested that muscle-resident non-myogenic mesenchymal progenitors are the likely source of osteoblasts and chondrocytes in HO. However, the previously identified markers of muscle-resident osteoprogenitors label up to half the osteoblasts within heterotopic lesions, suggesting other cell populations are involved. We have identified alpha smooth muscle actin (αSMA) as a marker of osteoprogenitor cells in bone and periodontium, and of osteo-chondro progenitors in the periosteum during fracture healing. We therefore utilized a lineage tracing approach to evaluate whether αSMACreERT2 identifies osteoprogenitors in the muscle. We show that in the muscle, αSMACreERT2 labels both perivascular cells, and satellite cells. αSMACre-labeled cells undergo osteogenic differentiation in vitro and form osteoblasts and chondrocytes in BMP2-induced HO in vivo. In contrast, Pax7CreERT2-labeled muscle satellite cells were restricted to myogenic differentiation in vitro, and rarely contributed to HO in vivo. Our data indicate that αSMACreERT2 labels a large proportion of osteoprogenitors in skeletal muscle, and therefore represents another marker of muscle-resident cells with osteogenic potential under HO-inducing stimulus. In contrast, muscle satellite cells make minimal contribution to bone formation in vivo.

Bioreactor-Based Bone Tissue Engineering

The aim of this chapter is to describe the main issues of bone tissue engineering. Bone transplants are widely used in orthopedic, plastic and reconstructive surgery. Current technologies like autologous and allogenic transplantation have several disadvantages making them relatively unsatisfactory, like donor site morbidity, chronic pain, and immunogenicity and risk hazard from infectious disease. Therefore, regenerative orthopedics seeks to establish a successful protocol for the healing of severe bone damage using engineered bone grafts. The optimization of protocols for bone graft production using autologous mesenchymal stem cells loaded on appropriate scaffolds, exposed to osteogenic inducers and mechanical force in bioreactor, should be able to solve the current limitations in managing bone injuries. We discuss mesenchymal stem cells as the most suitable cell type for bone tissue engineering. They can be isolated from a variety of mesenchymal tissues and can differentiate into osteoblasts when given appropriate mechanical support and osteoinductive signal. Mechanical support can be provided by different cell scaffolds based on natural or synthetic biomaterials, as well as combined composite materials. Three-dimensional support is enabled by bioreactor systems providing several advantages as mechanical loading, homogeneous distribution of cells and adequate nutrients/waste exchange. We also discuss the variety of osteoinductive signals that can be applied in bone tissue engineering. The near future of bone healing and regeneration is closely related to advances in tissue engineering. The optimization of protocols of bone graft production using autologous mesenchymal stem cells loaded on appropriate scaffolds, exposed to osteogenic inducers and mechanical force in bioreac‐ tor, should be able to solve the current limitations in managing bone injuries.