The use of endothelial progenitor cells combined with barrier membrane for the reconstruction of peri‐implant osseous defects: an animal experimental study

Machtei, Eli E.; Kim, David M.; Karimbux, Nadeem Y.; Zigdon‐Giladi, Hadar

doi:10.1111/jcpe.12511

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While the results presented in the current experiment and in the studies by Ramos et al () and Machtei et al () indicate that bone substitute materials do not provide obvious advantages in achieving bone fill or re‐osseointegration, interpretation must be made with care and considering the specific nature of the experimental model. Thus, the osseous defect that occurs in the dog mandible following experimental peri‐implantitis has often a contained, symmetric morphology with well‐preserved bone walls.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Re‐osseointegration following reconstructive surgical therapy of experimental peri‐implantitis. A pre‐clinical in vivo study

Almohandes

Carcuac

Abrahamsson

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the effect of bone substitute materials on hard and soft tissue healing in reconstructive surgical therapy of experimental peri‐implantitis at implants with different surface characteristics. Material and methods Six female, Labrador dogs were used. 3 months after tooth extraction, four implants with two different surface characteristics (A and B) were installed on each side of the mandible. Experimental peri‐implantitis was induced 3 months later. During surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis, the implants were cleaned with curettes and cotton pellets soaked in saline. The implant sites were allocated to one of four treatment categories; (a) Group C; no augmentation, (b) Group T1; bone defect filled with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (c) Group T2; bone defect filled with a biphasic bone graft material, (d) Group T3; bone defect filled as T1 and covered with a collagen membrane. Clinical and radiological examinations were performed, and biopsies were obtained and prepared for histological analysis 6 months after peri‐implantitis surgery. Results Implant B (smooth surface) sites showed significantly (a) larger radiographic bone level gain, (b) enhanced resolution of peri‐implantitis lesions, and (c) larger frequency of re‐osseointegration than implant A (moderately rough surface) sites. Implant B sites also showed superior preservation of the mucosal margin. Differences between bone substitute materials and control procedures were overall small with limited advantages for T1 and T2 sites. Conclusion Healing following reconstructive surgical treatment of experimental peri‐implantitis was superior around implants with a smooth surface than implants with a moderately rough surface. Benefits of using bone substitute materials during surgical therapy were overall small.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Re‐osseointegration following reconstructive surgical therapy of experimental peri‐implantitis. A pre‐clinical in vivo study

Almohandes

Carcuac

Abrahamsson

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, no immunological reactions related to the use of allogeneic or human cells were reported in these studies. Most studies reported on the use of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSC); three studies used periosteal cells (POC) (Mizuno et al, ; Ribeiro et al, , b), two studies used periodontal ligament stem cells (PDLSC) (Kim et al, ; Park et al, ), two studies used adipose tissue‐derived MSC (Bressan et al, ; Xu et al, ) and one study used endothelial progenitor cells (Machtei et al, ). MSC were used in early (one to six) passages, with (seven studies) or without osteogenic pre‐induction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Observation times ranged between 2 and 16 weeks for dogs (average, 9 weeks), whereas it was 8 weeks for sheep. Sixteen studies reported surgically created peri‐implant defects, whereas three studies in dogs reported ligature‐induced peri‐implantitis (LIPI) models (Machtei et al, ; Park et al, ; Xu et al, ). In the majority of studies, implants were placed in healed extraction sites after an average healing period of 3 months, and defects with a circumferential, dehiscence, intrabony or supra‐alveolar component were prepared (Table ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Information regarding experimental animals and their housing and husbandry was generally inadequate – the majority of studies lacked complete information regarding the animals' age and gender (Table ). Only one study provided information on the sample size calculation and baseline characteristics of the animals (Machtei et al, ). In 11 studies (58%), animals or defects were randomly allocated to different treatment groups to minimize ‘selection bias’.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bone tissue engineering in oral peri-implant defects in preclinicalin vivoresearch: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Shanbhag

Pandis

Mustafa

et al. 2017

J Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The regeneration and establishment of osseointegration within oral peri-implant bone defects remains a clinical challenge. Bone tissue engineering (BTE) is emerging as a promising alternative to autogenous and/or biomaterial-based bone grafting. The objective of this systematic review was to answer the focused question: in animal models, do cell-based BTE strategies enhance bone regeneration and/or implant osseointegration in experimental peri-implant defects, compared with grafting with autogenous bone or only biomaterial scaffolds? Electronic databases were searched for controlled animal studies reporting on peri-implant defects and implantation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) or other cells seeded on biomaterial scaffolds, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for the outcomes histomorphometric bone area fraction (BA) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). Nineteen studies reporting on large animal models (dogs and sheep) were included. Experimental defects were created surgically (16 studies) or via ligature-induced peri-implantitis (LIPI, three studies). In general, studies presented with an unclear to high risk of bias. In most studies, MSC were used in combination with alloplastic mineral phase or polymer scaffolds; no study directly compared cell-loaded scaffolds vs. autogenous bone. In three studies, cells were also modified by ex vivo gene transfer of osteoinductive factors. The meta-analyses indicated statistically significant benefits in favour of: (a) cell-loaded vs. cell-free scaffolds [weighted mean differences (WMD) of 10.73-12.30% BA and 11.77-15.15% BIC] in canine surgical defect and LIPI models; and (b) gene-modified vs. unmodified cells (WMD of 29.44% BA and 16.50% BIC) in canine LIPI models. Overall, heterogeneity in the meta-analyses was high (I 70-88%); considerable variation was observed among studies regarding the nature of cells and scaffolds used. In summary, bone regeneration and osseointegration in peri-implant defects are enhanced by the addition of osteogenic cells to biomaterial scaffolds. Although the direction of treatment outcome is clearly in favour of BTE strategies, due to the limited magnitude of treatment effect observed, no conclusive statements regarding the clinical benefit of such procedures for oral indications can yet be made. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…Many researchers have shown endothelial progenitor cells to be effective in cell-based therapies to improve vasculogenesis/angiogenesis, for a variety of therapeutic applications [27,28]. Other studies demonstrated that local application of EPCs into bone defects resulted in a significant increase in bone formation [20,29,30]. The accumulated evidence supports the contribution of EPCs to bone formation; nevertheless, the mechanisms of action remains unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Paracrine Role of Endothelial Cells in Bone Formation via CXCR4/SDF-1 Pathway

Tamari

Kawar-Jaraisy²,

Doppelt

et al. 2020

Cells

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vascularization is a prerequisite for bone formation. Endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) stimulate bone formation by creating a vascular network. Moreover, EPCs secrete various bioactive molecules that may regulate bone formation. The aim of this research was to shed light on the pathways of EPCs in bone formation. In a subcutaneous nude mouse ectopic bone model, the transplantation of human EPCs onto β-TCP scaffold increased angiogenesis (p < 0.001) and mineralization (p < 0.01), compared to human neonatal dermal fibroblasts (HNDF group) and a-cellular scaffold transplantation (β-TCP group). Human EPCs were lining blood vessels lumen; however, the majority of the vessels originated from endogenous mouse endothelial cells at a higher level in the EPC group (p < 01). Ectopic mineralization was mostly found in the EPCs group, and can be attributed to the recruitment of endogenous mesenchymal cells ten days after transplantation (p < 0.0001). Stromal derived factor-1 gene was expressed at high levels in EPCs and controlled the migration of mesenchymal and endothelial cells towards EPC conditioned medium in vitro. Blocking SDF-1 receptors on both cells abolished cell migration. In conclusion, EPCs contribute to osteogenesis mainly by the secretion of SDF-1, that stimulates homing of endothelial and mesenchymal cells. This data may be used to accelerate bone formation in the future.

show abstract

The use of endothelial progenitor cells combined with barrier membrane for the reconstruction of peri‐implant osseous defects: an animal experimental study

Abstract: β-TCP loaded with EPC and covered with a membrane-enhanced bone formation around previously contaminated dental implants in an experimental peri-implantitis canine model.

Cited by 14 publications

References 36 publications

Re‐osseointegration following reconstructive surgical therapy of experimental peri‐implantitis. A pre‐clinical in vivo study

Re‐osseointegration following reconstructive surgical therapy of experimental peri‐implantitis. A pre‐clinical in vivo study

Bone tissue engineering in oral peri-implant defects in preclinicalin vivoresearch: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The Paracrine Role of Endothelial Cells in Bone Formation via CXCR4/SDF-1 Pathway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About