Intraoral Bone Regeneration Using Stem Cells-What a Clinician Needs to Know: Based on a 15-Year MEDLINE Search
Jain V., Sybil D., Premchandani S., Krishna M., Singh S.
Narrative Review, published in Front Dent (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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 Dent (2021)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 35965732
- PMCID
- PMC9355835
- DOI
- 10.18502/fid.v18i40.7774
Abstract (original English)
The choice of an appropriate autogenous source of stem cells has not been adequately addressed especially for intraoral bone regeneration. The current review aims to assess the clinical success of various human stem cells in oral bone regeneration. Articles studying the potential of various stem cells utilized for reconstruction of intraoral bone defects in humans were included in this review. Relevant articles were electronically searched in MEDLINE-PubMed database using keywords with different combinations. Only the articles published in English between 2006 and 2020 were included in this review. It was concluded that intra and extraoral stem cells can be successfully used for bone regeneration of various jaw defects. Depending on the origin, quantity, and quality, each cell type has its own advantages and disadvantages. Also, it brings to the fore the need for more clinical studies to validate and adopt the use of stem cells in regular clinical practice.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.