Effect of autologous bone marrow-derived cells associated with guided bone regeneration or not in the treatment of peri-implant defects

Ribeiro, Fernanda Vieira; Suaid, Fabricia Ferreira; Silvério, Karina Gonzáles; Rodrigues, T.; Carvalho, Marcelo Diniz; Nociti, Francisco Humberto; Sallum, Enílson Antônio; Casati, Márcio Zaffalon

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2011.06.025

Cited by 14 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study by the same group evaluated the success of MSCs isolated and cultured from bone marrow using the same dog peri-implant defect model. 17 The authors concluded 9.30 1 1.87* 65.7 1 8.9* 43.7 1 9.3* *p = .000 (All parameters were significantly lower in group 4 than any of the other groups. There was no significant difference among groups 1, 2, and 3 for any of the parameters).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Both groups showed good results without significant difference between the groups. Another study by the same group evaluated the success of MSCs isolated and cultured from bone marrow using the same dog peri‐implant defect model . The authors concluded that the defects treated with MSC either covered with membrane or uncovered had better bone healing than nontreated defects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment of Peri‐Implant Defects in the Rabbit's Tibia with Adipose or Bone Marrow‐Derived Mesenchymal Stems Cells

Özgür

Supachawaroj

Soontornvipart

et al. 2015

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Peri‐Implant Defects in the Rabbit's Tibia with Adipose or Bone Marrow‐Derived Mesenchymal Stems Cells

Özgür

Supachawaroj

Soontornvipart

et al. 2015

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Han et al ; Hao et al ; Ito et al ; Kim et al ; Park et al ; Ribeiro et al ; Xu et al ; Yun et al ; Zou et al ). Multiple secondary quantitative histological parameters were also used, including new bone formation (Hao et al ; Kim et al ; Park et al ; Ribeiro et al ; Xu et al ), bone density (Han et al ; Yun et al ; Zou et al ), bone height (Hao et al ; Ribeiro et al ), first BIC height (Park et al ), ratio of re‐osseointegrated bone height (Park et al ), bone fill (Ribeiro et al ), and bone width (Ribeiro et al ). Furthermore, few studies evaluated bone mineral apposition rates using double or triple fluorochromes (Wang et al ; Zou et al ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data were extracted independently by two reviewers (C. C. V. and G. M. V.), with disagreements resolved by discussion with a third reviewer (M. Y. O. M.). Authors of six publications were contacted to clarify data or to provide missing information (Park et al ; Yun et al ; Ribeiro et al ; Wang et al ; Kim et al ; Ito et al ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of stem cells on the healing of peri‐implant defects: systematic review of preclinical studies

Misawa

Huynh‐Ba

Villar

et al. 2016

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review considers the evidence from animal studies evaluating the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) in the treatment of intraoral peri‐implant defects. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS databases were searched for quantitative preclinical controlled animal model studies that evaluated the effect of MSC on bone healing at intraoral peri‐implant bone defects. The primary outcome was the amount of (re‐)osseointegration reported as bone‐to‐implant contact in the defect area. The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses statement guidelines. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Only one study induced peri‐implant inflammation to produce peri‐implant bone defects. In all others, defects were surgically created at implant installation. Differences in defect morphology were identified among the studies. Both xenogenous and autogenous MSC were used to treat peri‐implant defects. These included bone marrow‐derived MSC, periodontal ligament‐derived MSC, umbilical cord MSC, bone marrow‐derived mononuclear cells, and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Meta‐analysis was not possible because of heterogeneities in study designs. Nonetheless, in most studies, local MSC implantation was not associated with adverse effects and had a positive effect on bone healing around peri‐implant defects. Combination of MSC with membranes and bioactive factors appears to provide improved treatment outcomes. In large animal models, intraoral use of MSC may provide beneficial effects on bone healing within peri‐implant defects. The various degrees of success of MSC in peri‐implant bone healing are likely to be related to the use of cells from various populations, tissues, and donor species. However, human safety and efficacy must be demonstrated before its clinical use can be considered.

show abstract

“…Ribeiro et al [61] have investigated the effect of bone marrow-derived cells associated with guided bone regeneration in the treatment of dehiscence bone defects around dental implants and suggested that bone marrow-derived cells provided promising results for peri-implantar bone regeneration, although the combined approach seems to be relevant, especially to bone formation out of the implant threads. Similarly, Kim et al [62] evaluated the potential of periodontal ligament stem cells and bone marrow stem cells on alveolar bone regeneration in a canine peri-implant defect model and demonstrated the feasibility of using stem cell-mediated bone regeneration to treat peri-implant defects.…”

Section: Mesenchymal Stem Cells In the Reconstruction Of The Osseous mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Optimizing Bone Volume at the Dental Implant Recipient Site

Ayna¹,

Gülses²,

Wiltfang³

et al. 2017

Mesenchymal Stem Cells - Isolation, Characterization and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inadequate bone volume at the implant recipient site presents a clinical challenge for many dental practitioners. To overcome these problems, several approaches have been developed and are currently used, including bone grafting strategies and distraction osteogenesis. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have gained their popularity within the last two decades, with regard to promising clinical results in improving the bone architecture at the implant recipient site. The aim of this chapter was to briefly outline the accessibility properties, differentiation capacities, isolation, and characterization of MSCs with regard to optimizing bone volume in dental implantology. Additionally, potential benefits and pitfalls are discussed in comparison with the conventional bone augmentation techniques.

show abstract

Effect of autologous bone marrow-derived cells associated with guided bone regeneration or not in the treatment of peri-implant defects

Cited by 14 publications

References 25 publications

Treatment of Peri‐Implant Defects in the Rabbit's Tibia with Adipose or Bone Marrow‐Derived Mesenchymal Stems Cells

Treatment of Peri‐Implant Defects in the Rabbit's Tibia with Adipose or Bone Marrow‐Derived Mesenchymal Stems Cells

Efficacy of stem cells on the healing of peri‐implant defects: systematic review of preclinical studies

Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Optimizing Bone Volume at the Dental Implant Recipient Site

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About