Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Aging and Senescence of Dental Pulp and Hard Tissues of the Tooth

Maeda H.

Narrative Review, published in Front Cell Dev Biol (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Front Cell Dev Biol (2020)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
33330507
PMCID
PMC7734349
DOI
10.3389/fcell.2020.605996
Citations
65

Abstract (original English)

The ability to consume a meal using one's own teeth influences an individual's quality of life. In today's global aging society, studying the biological changes in aging teeth is important to address this issue. A tooth includes three hard tissues (enamel, dentin, and cementum) and a soft tissue (dental pulp). With advancing age, these tissues become senescent; each tissue exhibits a unique senescent pattern. This review discusses the structural alterations of hard tissues, as well as the molecular and physiological changes in dental pulp cells and dental pulp stem cells during human aging. The significance of senescence in these cells remains unclear. Thus, there is a need to define the regulatory mechanisms of aging and senescence in these cells to aid in preservation of dental health.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.