Cargando…

Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro

During bone remodeling osteoclasts resorb bone, thus removing material, e.g., damaged by microcracks, which arises as a result of physiological loading and could reduce bone strength. Such a process needs targeted bone resorption exactly at damaged sites. Osteocytic signaling plays a key role in thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rumpler, Monika, Würger, Tanja, Roschger, Paul, Zwettler, Elisabeth, Peterlik, Herwig, Fratzl, Peter, Klaushofer, Klaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3282896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22271249
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00223-011-9568-z
_version_ 1782224140674007040
author Rumpler, Monika
Würger, Tanja
Roschger, Paul
Zwettler, Elisabeth
Peterlik, Herwig
Fratzl, Peter
Klaushofer, Klaus
author_facet Rumpler, Monika
Würger, Tanja
Roschger, Paul
Zwettler, Elisabeth
Peterlik, Herwig
Fratzl, Peter
Klaushofer, Klaus
author_sort Rumpler, Monika
collection PubMed
description During bone remodeling osteoclasts resorb bone, thus removing material, e.g., damaged by microcracks, which arises as a result of physiological loading and could reduce bone strength. Such a process needs targeted bone resorption exactly at damaged sites. Osteocytic signaling plays a key role in this process, but it is not excluded that osteoclasts per se may possess toposensitivity to recognize and resorb damaged bone since it has been shown that resorption spaces are associated with microcracks. To address this question, we used an in vitro setup of a pure osteoclast culture and mineralized substrates with artificially introduced microcracks and microscratches. Histomorphometric analyses and statistical evaluation clearly showed that these defects had no effect on osteoclast resorption behavior. Osteoclasts did not resorb along microcracks, even when resorption started right beside these damages. Furthermore, quantification of resorption on three different mineralized substrates, cortical bone, bleached bone (bone after partial removal of the organic matrix), and dentin, revealed lowest resorption on bone, significantly higher resorption on bleached bone, and highest resorption on dentin. The difference between native and bleached bone may be interpreted as an inhibitory impact of the organic matrix. However, the collagen-based matrix could not be the responsible part as resorption was highest on dentin, which contains collagen. It seems that osteocytic proteins, stored in bone but not present in dentin, affect osteoclastic action. This demonstrates that osteoclasts per se do not possess a toposensitivity to remove microcracks but may be influenced by components of the organic bone matrix.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3282896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32828962012-03-01 Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro Rumpler, Monika Würger, Tanja Roschger, Paul Zwettler, Elisabeth Peterlik, Herwig Fratzl, Peter Klaushofer, Klaus Calcif Tissue Int Original Research During bone remodeling osteoclasts resorb bone, thus removing material, e.g., damaged by microcracks, which arises as a result of physiological loading and could reduce bone strength. Such a process needs targeted bone resorption exactly at damaged sites. Osteocytic signaling plays a key role in this process, but it is not excluded that osteoclasts per se may possess toposensitivity to recognize and resorb damaged bone since it has been shown that resorption spaces are associated with microcracks. To address this question, we used an in vitro setup of a pure osteoclast culture and mineralized substrates with artificially introduced microcracks and microscratches. Histomorphometric analyses and statistical evaluation clearly showed that these defects had no effect on osteoclast resorption behavior. Osteoclasts did not resorb along microcracks, even when resorption started right beside these damages. Furthermore, quantification of resorption on three different mineralized substrates, cortical bone, bleached bone (bone after partial removal of the organic matrix), and dentin, revealed lowest resorption on bone, significantly higher resorption on bleached bone, and highest resorption on dentin. The difference between native and bleached bone may be interpreted as an inhibitory impact of the organic matrix. However, the collagen-based matrix could not be the responsible part as resorption was highest on dentin, which contains collagen. It seems that osteocytic proteins, stored in bone but not present in dentin, affect osteoclastic action. This demonstrates that osteoclasts per se do not possess a toposensitivity to remove microcracks but may be influenced by components of the organic bone matrix. Springer-Verlag 2012-01-24 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3282896/ /pubmed/22271249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00223-011-9568-z Text en © The Author(s) 2012 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Rumpler, Monika
Würger, Tanja
Roschger, Paul
Zwettler, Elisabeth
Peterlik, Herwig
Fratzl, Peter
Klaushofer, Klaus
Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title_full Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title_fullStr Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title_full_unstemmed Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title_short Microcracks and Osteoclast Resorption Activity In Vitro
title_sort microcracks and osteoclast resorption activity in vitro
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3282896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22271249
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00223-011-9568-z
work_keys_str_mv AT rumplermonika microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT wurgertanja microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT roschgerpaul microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT zwettlerelisabeth microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT peterlikherwig microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT fratzlpeter microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro
AT klaushoferklaus microcracksandosteoclastresorptionactivityinvitro