SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

Cell-Based Therapy for Tooth Replantation Following Avulsion: A Systematic Review.

Chew JRJ., Tan BL., Lu JX., Tong HJ., Duggal MS.

Systematic Review on Ligament Injury, published in Tissue Eng Part B Rev (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

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
Systematic Review
Journal
Tissue Eng Part B Rev (2022)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
PMID
33593127
DOI
10.1089/ten.TEB.2021.0016

Abstract (original English)

The management of avulsed teeth undergoing delayed replantation remains a clinical challenge as there are currently no effective interventions that can improve periodontal healing and prevent replacement root resorption. While several preclinical studies have reported varied success using cell-based tissue engineering to improve periodontal healing, a consensus is required before further clinical translation. Therefore, this systematic review seeks to evaluate the efficacy of cell-based therapy in promoting periodontal healing following delayed replantation in animal models. MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase were searched on September 27, 2020. Ten studies involving rodent and dog models met the inclusion criteria. Cell sources included gingiva, periodontal ligament (PDL), bone marrow, and adipose tissues. Generally, cell-based therapy had increased the proportion of root surfaces displaying periodontal healing and concomitantly reduced the proportion presenting with replacement root resorption and ankylosis. The best outcomes were observed following treatment with PDL-derived cells of various potency. Future preclinical studies will benefit from adopting measures to minimize bias during the conduct of animal experiments and the standardization of the outcome measures reporting. This will facilitate future reviews with possible pooling of results in the form of meta-analyses, allowin

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsAnkylosisDogsHumansProspective StudiesRoot ResorptionTooth AvulsionTooth Replantation
Face & SkinLigament Injury
View on PubMedDOI

Related research