PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8744520

Fluoride and the skeleton.

M Kleerekoper
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Fluoride has the potential to increase skeletal mass to a greater extent than any other pharmacologic agent, yet it has proven difficult to translate this into therapeutic benefit for patients with low bone mass in diseases such as osteoporosis. This apparent paradox can be explained in part by toxic actions of the ion on skeletal mineralization, impairment of the normal processes of bone resorption, and fluoride-induced decreases in strength per unit of bone (mass or volume). In part, the paradox can be explained by the late stage of osteoporosis in most patients enrolled in controlled clinical trials of fluoride, with alterations in skeletal microarchitecture beyond which restoration of mechanical integrity is not likely. Exposure of calcified tissues to environmental fluoride (water supply, dentifrices) also offers paradoxes. The anticaries effects are well documented as are the deleterious skeletal effects of endemic fluorosis when environmental exposure is too high. More controversial is the effect of seemingly nontoxic levels of exposure on the prevalence of osteoporotic fractures of the hip. This review attempts to provide a balanced overview of the conflicting literature concerning therapeutic and environmental effects of fluoride on the skeleton.

Explore related subjects

Bone and BonesFluoridationFluoridesHumansOsteoporosisSodium FluorideJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Kleerekoper. 1996. Fluoride and the skeleton.. https://doi.org/10.3109/10408369609083059

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic findings in dedifferentiated liposarcoma with neural-like whorling pattern and metaplastic bone formation.

Dedifferentiated liposarcoma is a subtype of liposarcoma characterized by juxtaposition of well-differentiated liposarcoma with a nonadipocytic sarcoma. A peculiar form of dedifferentiated liposarcoma has been described, characterized by a nonlipogenic component with a neural-like whorling pattern of growth and metaplastic bone formation. We report the cytogenetic and molecular genetic findings of this peculiar form of dedifferentiation in a retroperitoneal tumor found in a 58-year-old female. The neoplasm had typical histologic findings and a complex karyotype characterized by several numeric and structural chromosomal abnormalities, including the presence of ring and giant rod chromosomes. Molecular cytogenetic studies found high levels of amplification of the MDM2 oncogene, consistent with the amplification of the 12q14 chromosome band, a cytogenetic abnormality commonly found in these tumors. These findings indicate that, despite its unique and peculiar morphologic features, this unusual type of dedifferentiated liposarcoma shares many of the cytogenetic features and molecular genetic abnormalities found in other forms of dedifferentiation. The specific cytogenetics and molecular determinants of these peculiar morphologic findings, however, remain unknown.

Bone and Bones↗
PubMed2007

Traditional and virtual microscopy compared experimentally in a classroom setting.

The technology known as virtual microscopy is now widely available to medical students. A number of medical school histology and pathology course directors, including those at the Eastern Virginia Medical School, are exploring the question of how best to make use of this new tool. The current study compared the efficacy of teaching and testing one unit of histology, bone and cartilage, using two technologies, namely, virtual microscopy and traditional microscopy. Additionally, the study examined whether low, moderate, high moderate, or high achieving students perform more effectively in any of the learning/testing formats. In a completely randomized block design, 96 first semester, first-year medical students were grouped by previous exam quartiles then subsequently randomly assigned to one of four groups. Using identical laboratory exercises with highly comparable slides for each experimental group, half of the subjects learned the exercise with traditional microscopy and half learned with virtual microscopy. Subjects were further randomly subdivided into virtual or actual testing groups. The authors found no significant differences in test scores when they examined effects by learning group or by testing group, nor were there significant interaction effects. Student performance evaluated by previous exam quartile was significant (P < 0.001). That is, students who had scored in a particular quartile on a previous test tended to score in the same quartile on the bone and cartilage test regardless of learning or testing method. In a short opinion survey, students were polled to evaluate their experience. Student preferences for both learning and testing method varied widely.

Bone and Bones↗