Influence of extracellular matrix scaffolds on histological outcomes of regenerative endodontics in experimental animal models: a systematic review

Abstract

Background Decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM) from several tissue sources has been proposed as a promising alternative to conventional scaffolds used in regenerative endodontic procedures (REPs). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the histological outcomes of studies utilizing dECM-derived scaffolds for REPs and to analyse the contributing factors that might influence the nature of regenerated tissues. Methods The PRISMA 2020 guidelines were used. A search of articles published until April 2024 was conducted in Google Scholar, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases. Additional records were manually searched in major endodontic journals. Original articles including histological results of dECM in REPs and in-vivo studies were included while reviews, in-vitro studies and clinical trials were excluded. The quality assessment of the included studies was analysed using the ARRIVE guidelines. Risk of Bias assessment was done using the (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool. Results Out of the 387 studies obtained, 17 studies were included for analysis. In most studies, when used as scaffolds with or without exogenous cells, dECM showed the potential to enhance angiogenesis, dentinogenesis and to regenerate pulp-like and dentin-like tissues. However, the included studies showed heterogeneity of decellularization methods, animal models, scaffold source, form and delivery, as well as high risk of bias and average quality of evidence. Discussion Decellularized ECM-derived scaffolds could offer a potential off-the-shelf scaffold for dentin-pulp regeneration in REPs. However, due to the methodological heterogeneity and the average quality of the studies included in this review, the overall effectiveness of decellularized ECM-derived scaffolds is still unclear. More standardized preclinical research is needed as well as well-constructed clinical trials to prove the efficacy of these scaffolds for clinical translation. Other The protocol was registered in PROSPERO database #CRD42023433026. This review was funded by the Science, Technology and Innovation Funding Authority (STDF) under grant number (44426).