Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Trends of regenerative tissue engineering for oral and maxillofacial reconstruction in veterinary medicine

Purbantoro SD., Taephatthanasagon T., Purwaningrum M., Hirankanokchot T., Peralta S., Fiani N.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in Front Vet Sci (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
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
Narrative Review
Journal
Front Vet Sci (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38450027
PMCID
PMC10915013
DOI
10.3389/fvets.2024.1325559
Citations
2

Abstract (original English)

Oral and maxillofacial (OMF) defects are not limited to humans and are often encountered in other species. Reconstructing significant tissue defects requires an excellent strategy for efficient and cost-effective treatment. In this regard, tissue engineering comprising stem cells, scaffolds, and signaling molecules is emerging as an innovative approach to treating OMF defects in veterinary patients. This review presents a comprehensive overview of OMF defects and tissue engineering principles to establish proper treatment and achieve both hard and soft tissue regeneration in veterinary practice. Moreover, bench-to-bedside future opportunities and challenges of tissue engineering usage are also addressed in this literature review.

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 evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research