A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study pulpitis. (2nd February 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Richert, Raphaël; Ducret, Maxime; Alliot‐Licht, Brigitte; Bekhouche, Mourad; Gobert, Stéphanie; Farges, Jean‐Christophe
• Other Names: Dummer Paul guestEditor.
• Is Part Of: International endontic journal. Volume 55(2022)Supplement 1
• Page Start: 14
• Page End: 36
• Publication Date: 2022-02-02
• Subjects: big data -- biomarker -- caries -- dental pulp -- inflammation -- vital pulp therapy; Endodontics -- Periodicals; 617.6342
• DOI: 10.1111/iej.13683
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0143-2885

Abstract

Abstract: Pulpitis is the inflammatory response of the dental pulp to a tooth insult, whether it is microbial, chemical, or physical in origin. It is traditionally referred to as reversible or irreversible, a classification for therapeutic purposes that determines the capability of the pulp to heal. Recently, new knowledge about dental pulp physiopathology led to orientate therapeutics towards more frequent preservation of pulp vitality. However, full adoption of these vital pulp therapies by dental practitioners will be achieved only following better understanding of cell and tissue mechanisms involved in pulpitis. The current narrative review aimed to discuss the contribution of the most significant experimental models developed to study pulpitis. Traditionally, in vitro two (2D)‐ or three (3D)‐dimensional cell cultures or in vivo animal models were used to analyse the pulp response to pulpitis inducers at cell, tissue or organ level. In vitro, 2D cell cultures were mainly used to decipher the specific roles of key actors of pulp inflammation such as bacterial by‐products, pro‐inflammatory cytokines, odontoblasts or pulp stem cells. However, these simple models did not reproduce the 3D organisation of the pulp tissue and, with rare exceptions, did not consider interactions between resident cell types. In vitro, tissue/organ‐based models were developed to better reflect the complexity of the pulp structure. Their major disadvantage is that they did not allow the analysis of blood supply and innervation participation. On the contrary, in vivo models have allowed researchers to identify key immune, vascular and nervous actors of pulpitis and to understand their function and interplay in the inflamed pulp. However, inflammation was mainly induced by iatrogenic dentine drilling associated with simple pulp exposure to the oral environment or stimulation by individual bacterial by‐products for short periods. Clearly, these models did not reflect the long and progressive development of dental caries. Lastly, the substantial diversity of the existing models makes experimental data extrapolation to the clinical situation complicated. Therefore, improvement in the design and standardisation of future models, for example by using novel molecular biomarkers, databased models and artificial intelligence, will be an essential step in building an incremental knowledge of pulpitis in the future.