Bone Marrow Concentrate and Bovine Bone Mineral for Sinus Floor Augmentation: A Controlled, Randomized, Single-Blinded Clinical and Histological Trial—Per-Protocol Analysis

Sauerbier, Sebastian; Rickert, Daniela; Gutwald, Ralf; Nagursky, Heiner; Oshima, Toshiyuki; Xavier, Samuel Porfírio; Christmann, Johannes; Kurz, Patrick; Menne, Dieter; Vissink, Arjan; Raghoebar, Gerry M.; Schmelzeisen, Rainer; Wagner, Wilfried; Koch, Felix P.

doi:10.1089/ten.tea.2010.0516

Cited by 78 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To list a few, MSCs have been incorporated with hydroxyapatite/TCP scaffolds for the reconstruction of calvarial and alveolar bone in mice and dogs [De Kok et al, 2003;Mankani et al, 2006], seeded into microporous gelatin scaffold for the regeneration of calvarial defects in mice [Krebsbach et al, 1998], combined with PLA-based scaffolds to repair cranial bone defects in rabbits [Bidic et al, 2003], and loaded on hyaluronan-based scaffold in order to regenerate orbital rim defects in pigs [Radice et al, 2000]. MSCs with or without scaffold and osteogenic factors have been used for many sinus augmentation surgeries in many clinical trials [Gimbel et al, 2007;Pelegrine et al, 2010;Sauerbier et al, 2010;Rickert et al, 2011;Sauerbier et al, 2011;Hermund et al, 2012;Kaigler et al, 2013]. In addition, MSCs have been used by different delivery approaches in other craniofacial defects caused by traumatic bone defect, osteomyelitis, and tumor resection ( Table 2 ).…”

Section: Mscs For Treating Oral and Craniofacial Bone Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, MSCs have been used by different delivery approaches in other craniofacial defects caused by traumatic bone defect, osteomyelitis, and tumor resection ( Table 2 ). Most clinical trials in oral and craniofacial bone repair have reported promising results [Gimbel et al, 2007;Pelegrine et al, 2010;Sauerbier et al, 2010;Rickert et al, 2011;Sauerbier et al, 2011;Kaigler et al, 2013]; however, no statistically significant results were found in one clinical trial [Hermund et al, 2012]. Such controversial results may be rooted in the various technical errors.…”

Section: Mscs For Treating Oral and Craniofacial Bone Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Role of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Bone Regenerative Medicine: What Is the Evidence?

Oryan

Kamali²,

Moshiri³

et al. 2017

Cells Tissues Organs

291

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healing and regeneration of bone injuries, particularly those that are associated with large bone defects, are a complicated process. There is growing interest in the application of osteoinductive and osteogenic growth factors and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in order to significantly improve bone repair and regeneration. MSCs are multipotent stromal stem cells that can be harvested from many different sources and differentiated into a variety of cell types, such as preosteogenic chondroblasts and osteoblasts. The effectiveness of MSC therapy is dependent on several factors, including the differentiating state of the MSCs at the time of application, the method of their delivery, the concentration of MSCs per injection, the vehicle used, and the nature and extent of injury, for example. Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, together with genetic engineering and gene therapy, are advanced options that may have the potential to improve the outcome of cell therapy. Although several in vitro and in vivo investigations have suggested the potential roles of MSCs in bone repair and regeneration, the mechanism of MSC therapy in bone repair has not been fully elucidated, the efficacy of MSC therapy has not been strongly proven in clinical trials, and several controversies exist, making it difficult to draw conclusions from the results. In this review, we update the recent advances in the mechanisms of MSC action and the delivery approaches in bone regenerative medicine. We will also review the most recent clinical trials to find out how MSCs may be beneficial for treating bone defects.

show abstract

Section: Mscs For Treating Oral and Craniofacial Bone Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mscs For Treating Oral and Craniofacial Bone Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Bone Regenerative Medicine: What Is the Evidence?

Oryan

Kamali²,

Moshiri³

et al. 2017

Cells Tissues Organs

291

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been limited reports on the effect of bone marrow cells in distraction osteogenesis [30,45,55]. In 2007, Richards et al [47] observed marrow-derived progenitor cell injections enhanced new bone formation in a femoral distraction model of rat. In 2007, Kitoh et al [30,31] showed transplantation of culture-expanded bone marrow cells combined with PRP accelerated new bone formation during the distraction osteogenesis, especially in the femur, but with many disadvantages [47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate and Platelet-rich Plasma Enhanced Bone Healing in Distraction Osteogenesis of the Tibia

Lee¹,

Ryu²,

Kim³

et al. 2014

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background During lower limb lengthening, poor bone regeneration is a devastating complication. Several local or systemic applications have been used to promote osteogenesis, and biologic stimulations are gaining attention, but their utility has not been proven in this setting. Questions/purposes In patients undergoing bilateral tibial lengthening, we compared those receiving an osteotomy site injection of autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) plus platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with those not receiving such an injection in terms of external fixator index (time in external fixation divided by amount of lengthening), full weightbearing index (time until a patient was permitted to do full weightbearing divided by amount of lengthening), four cortical healing indexes (time until each cortical union divided by amount of lengthening), and callus shape and type. Methods Twenty-two patients (44 tibias) undergoing bilateral tibial lengthening enrolled in this randomized trial. Two patients were excluded, one due to insufficient radiographic evaluation and one who was lost to followup, leaving 20 patients (40 segments) for inclusion. Ten patients (20 segments) received BMAC combined with PRP injection (treatment group) and 10 patients (20 segments) received no injection (control group). All patients underwent stature lengthening for familial short stature with the lengthening over nail technique. Autologous BMAC combined with PRP was injected at the tibial osteotomy site at the end of the index surgery. Mean distraction rates were similar between groups (0.75 mm/day in the treatment group versus 0.72 mm/day in the control group; p = 0.24). Full weightbearing was permitted when we observed radiographic evidence of healing at two cortices; this assessment was made by the surgeon who was blinded to the treatment each patient received. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 28 months; range, 24-34 months).

show abstract

“…They found that HGF-loaded scaffolds promoted mineralisation, angiogenesis, new bone formation and β-TCP absorption [20]. Sauerbier et al [21] and Rickert et al [22] performed randomised controlled clinical trials to investigate formation of new bone in patients with severe atrophy of the maxillary sinus. Patients obtained an augmentation of the sinus from bovine bone material either with BMAC or autologous bone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repair of segmental long-bone defects by stem cell concentrate augmented scaffolds: a clinical and positron emission tomography - computed tomography analysis

Petri

Namazian

Wilke

et al. 2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone Marrow Concentrate and Bovine Bone Mineral for Sinus Floor Augmentation: A Controlled, Randomized, Single-Blinded Clinical and Histological Trial—Per-Protocol Analysis

Abstract: NBF after 3-4 months is equivalent in sinus, augmented with BMAC and BBM or a mixture of AB and BBM. This technique could be an alternative for using autografts to stimulate bone formation.

Cited by 78 publications

References 39 publications

Role of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Bone Regenerative Medicine: What Is the Evidence?

Role of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Bone Regenerative Medicine: What Is the Evidence?

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate and Platelet-rich Plasma Enhanced Bone Healing in Distraction Osteogenesis of the Tibia

Repair of segmental long-bone defects by stem cell concentrate augmented scaffolds: a clinical and positron emission tomography - computed tomography analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About