Reconstruction of Critical Sized Maxillofacial Defects Using Composite Allogeneic Tissue Engineering: Systematic Review of Current Literature

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)

The current review aimed to assess the reliability and efficacy of tissue-engineered composite grafts in the reconstruction of large maxillofacial defects resulting from trauma or a benign pathologic disease. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus up to March 2022. The eligibility criteria included patients who had been treated with composite allogeneic tissue engineering for immediate/delayed reconstruction of large maxillofacial defects with minimum/no bone harvesting site. In the initial search, 2614 papers were obtained, and finally, 13 papers were eligible to be included in the current study. Most included papers were case reports or case series. A total of 144 cases were enrolled in this systematic review. The mean age of the patients was 43.34 (age range: 9-89). Most studies reported a successful outcome. Bone tissue engineering for the reconstruction and regeneration of crucial-sized maxillofacial defects is an evolving science still in its infancy. In conclusion, this review paper and the current literature demonstrate the potential for using large-scale transplantable, vascularized, and customizable bone with the aim of reconstructing the large maxillofacial bony defects in short-term follow-ups.

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.