Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and pericyte progenitors (PPs) are both perivascular cells with similar multipotential properties regardless of tissue of origin. We compared the phenotype and function of the 2 cell types derived from the same bone-marrow samples but expanded in their respective media – pericyte conditions (endothelial cell growth medium 2 [EGM-2]) for PPs and standard medium (mesenchymal stem cell medium [MSM]) for MSCs. After 3 weeks of culture, whatever the expansion medium, all cells showed similar characteristics (MSC markers and adipo-osteo-chondroblastic differentiation potential), although neuronal potential was greater in EGM-2– than MSM-cultured cells. As compared with MSM-cultured MSCs, EGM-2–cultured PPs showed higher expression of the pericyte-specific antigen 3G5 than α-smooth muscle actin. In addition, EGM-2–cultured PPs showed an immature phenotype, with upregulation of stemness OCT4 and SOX2 proteins and downregulation of markers of osteoblastic, chondroblastic, adipocytic and vascular smooth muscle lineages. Despite having less effective in vitro immunosuppression capacities than standard MSCs, EGM-2–cultured PPs had higher engraftment potentials when combined with biomaterials heterotopically-transplanted in Nude mice. Furthermore, these engrafted cells generated more collagen matrix and were preferentially perivascular or lined trabeculae as compared with MSM-cultured MSCs. In conclusion, EGM-2–cultured PPs are highly immature cells with increased plasticity and engraftment potential.

The long-term clinical success of dental implants is related to their early osseointegration. This paper reviews the different steps of the interactions between biological fluids, cells, tissues, and surfaces of implants. Immediately following implantation, implants are in contact with proteins and platelets from blood. The differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells will then condition the peri-implant tissue healing. Direct bone-to-implant contact is desired for a biomechanical anchoring of implants to bone rather than fibrous tissue encapsulation. Surfaces properties such as chemistry and roughness play a determinant role in these biological interactions. Physicochemical features in the nanometer range may ultimately control the adsorption of proteins as well as the adhesion and differentiation of cells. Nanotechnologies are increasingly used for surface modifications of dental implants. Another approach to enhance osseointegration is the application of thin calcium phosphate (CaP) coatings. Bioactive CaP nanocrystals deposited on titanium implants are resorbable and stimulate bone apposition and healing. Future nanometer-controlled surfaces may ultimately direct the nature of peri-implant tissues and improve their clinical success rate.

In periodontal research, animal studies are complementary to in vitro experiments prior to testing new treatments. Animal models should make possible the validation of hypotheses and prove the safety and efficacy of new regenerating approaches using biomaterials, growth factors or stem cells. A review of the literature was carried out by using electronic databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Science). Numerous animal models in different species such as rats, hamsters, rabbits, ferrets, canines and primates have been used for modeling human periodontal diseases and treatments. However, both the anatomy and physiopathology of animals are different from those of humans, making difficult the evaluation of new therapies. Experimental models have been developed in order to reproduce major periodontal diseases (gingivitis, periodontitis), their pathogenesis and to investigate new surgical techniques. The aim of this review is to define the most pertinent animal models for periodontal research depending on the hypothesis and expected results.