Cargando…
Differential Recovery Patterns of the Maxilla and Mandible after Eliminating Nasal Obstruction in Growing Rats
Although nasal obstruction (NO) during growth causes maxillofacial growth suppression, it remains unclear whether eliminating the NO affects maxillary and mandibular growth differentially. We aimed to clarify whether eliminating NO can help regain normal maxillofacial growth and to determine the opt...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36555975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11247359 |
Sumario: | Although nasal obstruction (NO) during growth causes maxillofacial growth suppression, it remains unclear whether eliminating the NO affects maxillary and mandibular growth differentially. We aimed to clarify whether eliminating NO can help regain normal maxillofacial growth and to determine the optimal intervention timing. Forty-two 4-week-old male Wistar rats were randomly divided into six groups. Their left nostril was sutured to simulate NO over different durations in the experimental groups; the sutures were later removed to resume nasal breathing. Maxillofacial morphology was assessed using microcomputed tomography. Immunohistochemical changes in hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1α, osteoprotegerin (OPG), and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL) of the condylar cartilage were evaluated to reveal the underlying mechanisms of these changes. Maxillary length was significantly lower in rats with NO for ≥5 weeks. In groups with NO for ≥7 weeks, the posterior mandibular length, ramus height, thickness of the hypertrophic cell layer in the condylar cartilage, HIF-1α levels, and RANKL levels were significantly lower and OPG levels and RANKL/OPG were significantly higher than those in the control group. Our findings suggest that eliminating NO is effective in regaining maxillofacial growth. Moreover, the optimal timing of intervention differed between the maxilla and mandible. |
---|