Efficacy of stem cells on periodontal regeneration: Systematic review of pre‐clinical studies

This systematic review aims to evaluate mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) periodontal regenerative potential in animal models. MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases were searched for quantitative pre‐clinical controlled animal model studies that evaluated the effect of local administration of MSC on perio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of periodontal research 2017-10, Vol.52 (5), p.793-812
Hauptverfasser: Tassi, S. A., Sergio, N. Z., Misawa, M. Y. O., Villar, C. C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This systematic review aims to evaluate mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) periodontal regenerative potential in animal models. MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases were searched for quantitative pre‐clinical controlled animal model studies that evaluated the effect of local administration of MSC on periodontal regeneration. The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses statement guidelines. Twenty‐two studies met the inclusion criteria. Periodontal defects were surgically created in all studies. In seven studies, periodontal inflammation was experimentally induced following surgical defect creation. Differences in defect morphology were identified among the studies. Autogenous, alogenous and xenogenous MSC were used to promote periodontal regeneration. These included bone marrow‐derived MSC, periodontal ligament (PDL)‐derived MSC, dental pulp‐derived MSC, gingival margin‐derived MSC, foreskin‐derived induced pluripotent stem cells, adipose tissue‐derived MSC, cementum‐derived MSC, periapical follicular MSC and alveolar periosteal cells. Meta‐analysis was not possible due to heterogeneities in study designs. In most of the studies, local MSC implantation was not associated with adverse effects. The use of bone marrow‐derived MSC for periodontal regeneration yielded conflicting results. In contrast, PDL‐MSC consistently promoted increased PDL and cementum regeneration. Finally, the adjunct use of MSC improved the regenerative outcomes of periodontal defects treated with membranes or bone substitutes. Despite the quality level of the existing evidence, the current data indicate that the use of MSC may provide beneficial effects on periodontal regeneration. The various degrees of success of MSC in periodontal regeneration are likely to be related to the use of heterogeneous cells. Thus, future studies need to identify phenotypic profiles of highly regenerative MSC populations.
ISSN:0022-3484
1600-0765
DOI:10.1111/jre.12455