Autologous Bone Marrow-Derived Mononuclear Cells Combined With β-TCP for Maxillary Bone Augmentation in Implantation Procedures

Abstract

Replacing missing bone or adding mass to existing bone is often essential to the success of a dental implant. A large variety of graft materials have been used for maxillary and mandibular atrophy. To date there has been no graft material, which can be regarded as completely satisfactory. Our experience with freshly isolated autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells combined with β-tricalcium phosphate for augmentation of the extremely atrophied maxilla is presented. These techniques are based on stimulation of natural events continuously present in living bone (ie, the process of bone remodeling). The property of the mixture material for bone augmentation to place dental implant was discussed.

Comparison of concentrated fresh mononuclear cells and cultured mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow for bone regeneration

“…38,39 Bullin et al seeded BM-MNCs onto porous β-tricalcium phosphate scaffold materials for severe maxillary atrophy bone increase. 40 This study explored the microstructure of the regenerated bone tissue and the bone formation pattern in segmental defects in large animals. By high-resolution TPEF and SHG imaging, the collagen and endogenous fluorophores of the regenerated bone tissue were visualized without staining.…”

Intraoperative enrichment of bone autograft with autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells isolated simultaneously: moving towards tissue engineeringin situ

“…Notably, not only BM-MNCs but also bone marrow aspirate cells seeded on implants are capable of improving bone tissue regeneration in humans [10,19,20] .…”

The applications of regenerative medicine in sinus lift procedures: A systematic review

“…23 Four studies were excluded due to the limited number of cases. 8,[24][25][26] An additional study was excluded due to the absence of primary outcomes and reduced number of cases 27 and the last cause of exclusion was a reported clinical case. 15 The 18 studies selected for this systematic review were divided in 11 clinical trials 1,2,14,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] and seven randomized clinical trials.…”

“…16,38,41 Among these risks of bias, the most common was the lack of complete outcome data making comparisons between articles even more complicate. When we performed the same analysis for the CT 1,2,10,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] all of them present a high risk of bias because do not have an adequate sequence generation and an allocation concealment and most of them do not have been blinding to all outcomes.…”