Synthetic Scaffold/Dental Pulp Stem Cell (DPSC) Tissue Engineering Constructs for Bone Defect Treatment: An Animal Studies Literature Review
Lorusso F., Inchingolo F., Dipalma G., Postiglione F., Fulle S., Scarano A.
Meta-analysis, published in Int J Mol Sci (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Int J Mol Sci (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33371390
- PMCID
- PMC7767470
- DOI
- 10.3390/ijms21249765
- Citations
- 32
Abstract (original English)
Background Recently a greater interest in tissue engineering for the treatment of large bone defect has been reported. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effectiveness of dental pulp stem cells and synthetic block complexes for bone defect treatment in preclinical in vivo articles. Methods The electronic database and manual search was conducted on Pubmed, Scopus, and EMBASE. The papers identified were submitted for risk-of-bias assessment and classified according to new bone formation, bone graft characteristics, dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) culture passages and amount of experimental data. The meta-analysis assessment was conducted to assess new bone formation in test sites with DPSCs/synthetic blocks vs. synthetic block alone. Results The database search identified a total of 348 papers. After the initial screening, 30 studies were included, according to the different animal models: 19 papers on rats, 3 articles on rabbits, 2 manuscripts on sheep and 4 papers on swine. The meta-analysis evaluation showed a significantly increase in new bone formation in favor of DPSCs/synthetic scaffold complexes, if compared to the control at 4 weeks (Mean Diff: 17.09%, 95% CI: 15.16-18.91%, p p Conclusion The synthetic scaffolds in association of DPSCs used for the treatment of bone defects showed encouraging results of early new bone formati
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.