Clinical stem cell therapy in oral and craniofacial bone regeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration poses significant clinical challenges due to the anatomical complexity of this region and the inherent limitations of conventional reconstructive techniques. Stem cell-based therapies have emerged as a promising alternative in that stem cells harness the capacities of multilineage differentiation and paracrine signaling to enhance tissue regeneration. Nonetheless, the overall clinical efficacy of stem cell therapy remains a subject of debate. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to comprehensively evaluate the safety and effectiveness of stem cell therapy in oral and craniofacial bone regeneration. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted in July 2024, identifying 59 eligible prospective studies-including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials and single-arm studies-involving more than five participants each. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for randomized studies and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies. The included studies encompassed a broad range of surgical indications, such as alveolar cleft repair, alveolar ridge augmentation, sinus floor augmentation, periodontal defect regeneration, mandibular fracture management, pathological bone defect repair, and temporomandibular joint disorders. Over three-quarters of studies uti

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.

Browse all related research

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