Preview

Parodontologiya

Advanced search

Bone regeneration biomarkers in maxillofacial surgery: a critical review of literature

https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3759-2021-26-4-284-288

Abstract

Relevance. Drug-associated osteonecrosis is known to cause some pathological changes. The titers of biomarkers responsible for bone metabolism are also subject to such changes. They are essential in the diagnosis and treatment planning, especially during surgical interventions, because of the risk of osteonecrosis. Purpose – based on the data of modern scientific literature and articles, identifying markers of bone remodeling and endothelial disorders is of primary importance for optimizing the early diagnosis of microcirculati on disorders in patients with maxillofacial pathologies.
Materials and methods. A review of available data in the literature on normal bone anatomy, bone biomarkers, and regulatory factors. The study of diagnostic modes and identification of the most valuable and fastest in bone and vascular endothelium impairment.
Results. According to the studies, osteocalcin, C-terminal telopeptide, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase and VEGF are clinically the most informative for predicting jawbone osteonecrosis. With a serum C-terminal telopeptide concentration of less than 100 pg/mL, the risk of osteonecrosis increases. Serum osteocalcin is a specific biomarker of osteoblast function for assessing the rate of bone formation in osteoporosis. The average osteocalcin level revealed a significant difference between postmenopausal osteoporotic (16.16 ± 4.5 ng/ml) and non-osteoporotic (11.26 ± 3.07 ng/ml) women. Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP 5b) is used to reference the activity and number of osteoclasts. TRAP 5b can be specifically detected in serum by immunoassays.
Conclusion. The study of bone degeneration markers and vascular markers allows us to understand the principles of the occurrence of osteonecrosis more clearly, and, therefore, more clearly predict, diagnose osteonecrosis, and also correctly select the tactics of treatment for these patients, the type of surgical intervention, conservative, operative (partial resection, total jaw resection), – palliative, pre- and post-drug preparation of the body for intervention.

About the Authors

G. A. Kosach
First Pavlov State Medical University of St. Peterburg
Russian Federation

German A. Kosach, DMD, PhD student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Saint Petersburg



S. I. Kutukova
First Pavlov State Medical University of St. Peterburg; City Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation

Svetlana I. Kutukova, DMD, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Saint Petersburg



T. D. Vlasov
First Pavlov State Medical University of St. Peterburg
Russian Federation

Timur D. Vlasov, DMD, PhD, DSc, Professor, Head of the Department of Pathophysiology with the Course of  Clinical Pathophysiology

Saint Petersburg



A. I. Yaremenko
First Pavlov State Medical University of St. Peterburg
Russian Federation

Andrei I. Yaremenko, DMD, PhD, DSc, Professor, Head of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Saint Petersburg



References

1. Marx RE, et al. Oral bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis: risk factors, prediction of risk using serum CTX testing, prevention, and treatment. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2007. 65(12):2397-410 doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2007.08.003

2. Sales Lima MV1 de, et al. Denosumab Related Osteonecrosis of Jaw: a Case Report. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Research. 2018;Dec;30;9(4):e5. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2018.9405

3. Mawardi H, et al. Osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with ziv-aflibercept. Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. 2016 Dec;7(6):E81-E87. doi: 10.21037/jgo.2016.05.07

4. Harold N Rosen. Use of biochemical markers of bone turnover in osteoporosis. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. 2008;46(10):1345-57. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2008.310

5. Del Fattore, Andrea, Anna Teti, and Nadia Rucci. Osteoclast receptors and signaling. Archives of biochemistry and biophysics. 2008;473(2):147-60. doi: 10.1016/j.abb.2008.01.011

6. Chen X, et al. Osteoblast–osteoclast interactions. Connective tissue research. 2018;59(2):99-107. doi: 10.1080/03008207.2017.1290085

7. Kathryn L, ed. Pathophysiology: The Biologic Basis for Disease in Adults and Children. 8 edition. 2019. Available from: https://vk.com/doc313186384_520259268?hash=08f64af1b82bfc6a95&dl=c27e5d0e4f93077aa1

8. Brad W.Neville, et al. Periodontal Pathology, in Color Atlas of Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases. 2019;93-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-55225-7.00004-X

9. Marx RE. Pamidronate (Aredia) and zoledronate (Zometa) induced avascular necrosis of the jaws: a growing epidemic. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2003;61(9):1115-7. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2391(03)00720-1

10. Ruggiero SL et al. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw-2014 update. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2014;Oct;72(10):1938-56. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.08.017


Review

For citations:


Kosach GA, Kutukova SI, Vlasov TD, Yaremenko AI. Bone regeneration biomarkers in maxillofacial surgery: a critical review of literature. Parodontologiya. 2021;26(4):284-288. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3759-2021-26-4-284-288

Views: 559


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1683-3759 (Print)
ISSN 1726-7269 (Online)