Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisPubMed

Efficacy of stem cells on bone consolidation of distraction osteogenesis in animal models: a systematic review.

Morillo CMR., Sloniak MC., Gonçalves F., Villar CC.

Meta-analysis, published in Braz Oral Res (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

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
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
Meta-analysis
Journal
Braz Oral Res (2018)
Country
Brazil
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
30462749
DOI
10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0083

Abstract (original English)

Distraction osteogenesis (DO) relies on the recruitment and proliferation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) to the target site, where they differentiate into osteoblasts to promote bone formation. Nevertheless, MSC recruitment appears to be slow and limits bone formation in DO defects. Thus, this systematic review aims to evaluate the ability of locally applied MSC to enhance bone formation in DO preclinical models. Databases were searched for quantitative pre-clinical controlled studies that evaluated the effect of local administration of MSC on DO bone formation. Eligible studies were identified and data regarding study characteristics, outcome measures and quality were extracted. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Autogenous and xenogenous MSC were used to promote DO bone formation. These included bone marrow-derived MSC, adipose tissue-derived MSC and MSC derived from human exfoliated deciduous teeth. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneities in study designs. Local MSC implantation was not associated with adverse effects. In 4 out of the 5 studies, locally delivered undifferentiated bone-marrow MSC had a positive effect on DO bone formation. Few studies evaluated the therapeutic effects of MSC from other sources. The adjunct use of biologically active molecules or forced expression of key genes involved in osteogenesis further boosted the ability of bone-ma

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
AnimalsBiasBone RegenerationMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationMesenchymal Stem CellsModels, AnimalOsteogenesisOsteogenesis, DistractionReproducibility of ResultsRisk Factors

Browse all related research

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