Periodontal healing may be affected by aging: a histologic study in rats

Background and Objective:  Although wound healing has been reported to be impaired with aging, very little is known about its effect on periodontal tissues. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate, histologically in rats, the influence of aging on a spontaneous periodontal healing model. Ma...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of periodontal research Vol. 41; no. 4; pp. 329 - 333
Main Authors Benatti, B. B., Neto, J. B. C., Casati, M. Z., Sallum, E. A., Sallum, A. W., Nociti Jr, F. H.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.08.2006
Blackwell
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background and Objective:  Although wound healing has been reported to be impaired with aging, very little is known about its effect on periodontal tissues. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate, histologically in rats, the influence of aging on a spontaneous periodontal healing model. Material and Methods:  Twenty‐four male Wistar rats were used and assigned to the following groups: control (n = 12; 2 mo old) and aged (n = 12; 18 mo old). Fenestration defects (4 × 3 × 1 mm) were created bilaterally at the buccal aspect of the distal root of the first mandibular molars, and the mandibulae were retrieved 3 and 6 wk postoperatively. The percentage of bone fill and density of newly formed bone, new cementum formation (NC), and the extension of the remaining defect (ERD) were histometrically obtained. Results:  Intragroup analysis demonstrated that, except for cementum, all histological parameters significantly improved over time (p < 0.05). Intergroup analysis additionally showed that the defects were initially similar in size, and that at 3 wk aging negatively influenced newly formed bone (86.38 ± 2.99% and 73.06 ± 3.21%, p < 0.001, for groups control and aged, respectively), BF (75.84 ± 16.53% and 57.70 ± 22.28%, p = 0.014) and ERD (0.41 ± 0.20 mm and 1.17 ± 0.37 mm, p < 0.001). At 6 wk, aging negatively influenced newly formed bone (88.12 ± 2.90% and 78.19 ± 5.35%, p < 0.001, for groups control and aged, respectively) and ERD (0.01 ± 0.006 mm and 0.34 ± 0.18 mm, p = 0.003), but not BF (98.15 ± 2.43% and 87.87 ± 11.63%, p > 0.05). No new cementum was formed along the root surface in the above groups. Conclusion:  Within the limits of the present study, data analysis suggests that aging may impair, but not prevent, periodontal healing.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-69N4QN6W-J
ArticleID:JRE872
istex:28128872765AE78ED3CF193D880E126895C8E90A
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-3484
1600-0765
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0765.2006.00872.x