Oral diseases · 2021
Effect of tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib on tissue repair at tooth extraction sites.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ratzkowski Bruna, Koth Valesca S, Azambuja Alan A, Salum Fernanda G, de Figueiredo Maria A Z, Cherubini Karen
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Both zoledronic acid, a potent bisphosphonate, and the antiangiogenic drug sunitinib are included in anticancer protocols and have also been associated with jaw osteonecrosis. Our aim was to compare the effect of these drugs on tissue repair at tooth extraction sites.
METHODS: Wistar rats were allocated into four groups: (1) sunitinib; (2) sunitinib/zoledronic acid; (3) zoledronic acid; (4) control group. The animals underwent tooth extractions and maxillae were macro- and microscopically analyzed.
RESULTS: On macroscopic evaluation, the zoledronic acid group showed a significantly higher frequency of oral mucosal lesion; lesions in the sunitinib/zoledronic acid group were larger, albeit not significantly so. The sunitinib/zoledronic acid group had significantly less epithelium than the zoledronic acid and control group, but showed no significant difference compared to the sunitinib group. The sunitinib/zoledronic acid and zoledronic acid groups did not differ from each other, but had significantly less connective tissue and more non-vital bone and microbial colonies than sunitinib and control groups, whereas these latter two groups did not significantly differ from each other. Vital bone and inflammatory infiltrate did not significantly differ between groups.
CONCLUSION: Sunitinib alone is not associated with non-vital bone, whereas the sunitinib/zoledronic acid combination and zoledronic acid alone are.
METHODS: Wistar rats were allocated into four groups: (1) sunitinib; (2) sunitinib/zoledronic acid; (3) zoledronic acid; (4) control group. The animals underwent tooth extractions and maxillae were macro- and microscopically analyzed.
RESULTS: On macroscopic evaluation, the zoledronic acid group showed a significantly higher frequency of oral mucosal lesion; lesions in the sunitinib/zoledronic acid group were larger, albeit not significantly so. The sunitinib/zoledronic acid group had significantly less epithelium than the zoledronic acid and control group, but showed no significant difference compared to the sunitinib group. The sunitinib/zoledronic acid and zoledronic acid groups did not differ from each other, but had significantly less connective tissue and more non-vital bone and microbial colonies than sunitinib and control groups, whereas these latter two groups did not significantly differ from each other. Vital bone and inflammatory infiltrate did not significantly differ between groups.
CONCLUSION: Sunitinib alone is not associated with non-vital bone, whereas the sunitinib/zoledronic acid combination and zoledronic acid alone are.