-
Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical... 2019In the present study, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the biomaterials and their effectiveness for bone augmentation in implant dentistry. The databases of... (Review)
Review
In the present study, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the biomaterials and their effectiveness for bone augmentation in implant dentistry. The databases of Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information), and Scopus were searched for published studies between 2006 and March 30, 2018. We only included clinical studies in this research. Due to a lack of quantitative evidence and the vast heterogeneity of the biomaterials, implant surgery sites, implant types, follow-up periods, and various implant placement techniques (1-stage or 2-stage), we could not manage to do a meta-analysis on the 13 included studies. Several techniques can result in vertical bone augmentation. Complications can be seen in vertical bone augmentation and especially in the autogenous bone grafting; however, some biomaterials showed promising results to be practical substitutes for autogenous bone. Bio-Oss and beta-tricalcium phosphate are our second-level candidates for vertical bone augmentation due to their promising clinical results with the least infection and immunologic response risk. The gold standard, however, remains the autogenous bone graft. Further clinical studies in the future with exact report of bone measures are needed to develop new comparisons and quantitative analyses.
PubMed: 31041181
DOI: 10.4103/japtr.JAPTR_327_18 -
Stem Cell Research & Therapy Oct 2016Combined cell implantation has been widely applied in tissue engineering in recent years. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to establish whether the combined... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Combined cell implantation has been widely applied in tissue engineering in recent years. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to establish whether the combined transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) promotes angiogenesis and tissue repair, compared with transplantation of a single cell type, following tissue injury or during tissue regeneration.
METHODS
The electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Eighteen controlled preclinical studies involving MSC and EPC transplantation in animal models of disease, or in coculture in vitro, were included in this review. The vessel density and other functional indexes, which were classified according to the organ source, were used to evaluate the efficiency of cotransplantation. Publication bias was assessed.
RESULTS
There was no obvious difference in angiogenesis following combined cell transplantation (EPCs and MSCs) and transplantation of EPCs alone; however, an improvement in the function of damaged organs was observed following cotransplantation. In addition, combined cell transplantation significantly promoted tissue recovery in cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, and during bone regeneration. Compared with combined transplantation (EPCs and MSCs) and transplantation of MSCs alone, cotransplantation significantly promoted angiogenesis and bone regeneration, as well as vessel revascularization and tissue repair in cerebrovascular disease; however, no obvious effects on cardiovascular disease were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
As an exploratory field in the discipline of tissue engineering, MSC and EPC cotransplantation offers advantages, although it is essential to assess the feasibility of this approach before clinical trials can be performed.
Topics: Animals; Bone Regeneration; Coculture Techniques; Endothelial Progenitor Cells; Humans; Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation; Mesenchymal Stem Cells; Neovascularization, Physiologic; Osteogenesis; Tissue Engineering; Tissue Scaffolds; Wound Healing
PubMed: 27724974
DOI: 10.1186/s13287-016-0390-4 -
Cartilage Dec 2021Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic joint disease characterized by degeneration of articular cartilage and secondary osteogenesis. Cell-based agents, such as mesenchymal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic joint disease characterized by degeneration of articular cartilage and secondary osteogenesis. Cell-based agents, such as mesenchymal stem cells, have turned into the most extensively explored new therapeutic agents for OA. However, evidence-based research is still lacking.
METHODS
We searched public databases up to February 2020 and only included randomized controlled trials. The outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and serious adverse events (SAEs). A network meta-analysis was also performed in this work.
RESULTS
We included 13 studies in the meta-analysis. The effect size showed that cell-based therapy did not significantly reduce the WOMAC score at the 6-month follow-up (standard mean difference [SMD] -3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.90 to 0.18; = 0.1928). However, cell-based therapy significantly improved the KOOS at the 12-month follow-up (SMD 0.68; 95% CI 0.07-1.30; = 0.0288) and relieved pain (SMD -1.05; 95% CI -1.46 to -0.64; < 0.0001). The findings also indicated that high-dosage adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) may be more advantageous in terms of long-term effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Cell-based therapy had a better effect on KOOS improvement and pain relief without safety concerns. However, cell-based therapy did not show a benefit in terms of the WOMAC. Allogeneic cells might have advantages compared to controls in the WOMAC and KOOS scores. The long-term effect of high-dose ADMSC treatment for OA is worthy of further study.
Topics: Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation; Mesenchymal Stem Cells; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Regeneration; Transplantation, Autologous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32693632
DOI: 10.1177/1947603520942947 -
Journal of Functional Biomaterials Jan 2023(1) Background: Different compositions of biodegradable materials are being investigated to successfully replace non-resorbable ones in bone tissue regeneration in... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Different compositions of biodegradable materials are being investigated to successfully replace non-resorbable ones in bone tissue regeneration in dental surgery. The systematic review tried to address the question, "Can biodegradable polymers act as a replacement for conventional materials in dental surgery procedures?" (2) Methods: An electronic search of the PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted in October 2022. The following keywords were used: (lactide polymers) and (hydroxyapatite or fluorapatite) and (dentistry) and (regeneration). Initially, 59 studies were found. Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. (3) Results: These usually improved the properties and induced osteogenesis, tissue mineralisation and bone regeneration by inducing osteoblast proliferation. Five studies showed higher induction of osteogenesis in the case of biomaterials, UV-HAp/PLLA, ALBO-OS, bioresorbable raw particulate hydroxyapatite/poly-L-lactide and PLGA/Hap, compared to conventional materials such as titanium. Four studies confirmed improvement in tissue mineralisation with the usage of biomaterials: hydroxyapatite/polylactic acid (HA/PLA) loaded with dog's dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs), Coll/HAp/PLCL, PDLLA/VACNT-O:nHAp, incorporation of hydroxyapatite and simvastatin. Three studies showed an acceleration in proliferation of osteoblasts for the use of biomaterials with additional factors such as collagen and UV light. (4) Conclusions: Lactide polymers present higher osteointegration and cell proliferation rate than the materials compared. They are superior to non-biodegradable materials in terms of the biocompability, bone remodelling and healing time tests. Moreover, because there is no need of reoperation, as the material automatically degrades, the chance of scars and skin sclerosis is lower. However, more studies involving greater numbers of biomaterial types and mixes need to be performed in order to find a perfect biodegradable material.
PubMed: 36826882
DOI: 10.3390/jfb14020083 -
Stem Cell Research & Therapy Feb 2021To repair bone defects, a variety of bone substitution materials have been used, such as ceramics, metals, natural and synthetic polymers, and combinations thereof. In... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
To repair bone defects, a variety of bone substitution materials have been used, such as ceramics, metals, natural and synthetic polymers, and combinations thereof. In recent decades, a wide range of synthetic polymers have been used for bone regeneration. These polymers have the advantages of biocompatibility, biodegradability, good mechanical properties, low toxicity, and ease of processing. However, when used alone, they are unable to achieve ideal bone formation. Incorporating zinc (Zn) into synthetic polymers has been considered, as previous studies have shown that Zn promotes stem cell osteogenesis and mineral deposition. The purpose of this systematic review was to provide an overview of the application and effectiveness of Zn in synthetic polymers for bone regeneration, whether used alone or in combination with other biomaterials. This study was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search of the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases for articles published up to June 2020 revealed 153 relevant studies. After screening the titles, abstracts, and full texts, 13 articles were included in the review; 9 of these were in vitro, 3 were in vivo, and 1 included both in vitro and in vivo experiments.
RESULTS
At low concentrations, Zn promoted cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation, while high-dose Zn resulted in cytotoxicity and inhibition of osteogenic differentiation. Additionally, one study showed that Zn reduced apatite formation in simulated body fluid. In all of the in vivo experiments, Zn-containing materials enhanced bone formation.
CONCLUSIONS
At appropriate concentrations, Zn-doped synthetic polymer materials are better able to promote bone regeneration than materials without Zn.
Topics: Biocompatible Materials; Bone Regeneration; Osteogenesis; Polymers; Zinc
PubMed: 33579372
DOI: 10.1186/s13287-021-02195-y -
International Journal of Molecular... Dec 2023There is increasing interest in using magnesium (Mg) alloy orthopedic devices because of their mechanical properties and bioresorption potential. Concerns related to... (Review)
Review
Magnesium Alloys in Orthopedics: A Systematic Review on Approaches, Coatings and Strategies to Improve Biocompatibility, Osteogenic Properties and Osteointegration Capabilities.
There is increasing interest in using magnesium (Mg) alloy orthopedic devices because of their mechanical properties and bioresorption potential. Concerns related to their rapid degradation have been issued by developing biodegradable micro- and nanostructured coatings to enhance corrosion resistance and limit the release of hydrogen during degradation. This systematic review based on four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Scienceā¢ and ScienceDirect) aims to present state-of-the-art strategies, approaches and materials used to address the critical factors currently impeding the utilization of Mg alloy devices. Forty studies were selected according to PRISMA guidelines and specific PECO criteria. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using OHAT and SYRCLE tools for in vitro and in vivo studies, respectively. Despite limitations associated with identified bias, the review provides a comprehensive analysis of preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies focused on manufacturing and application of Mg alloys in orthopedics. This attests to the continuous evolution of research related to Mg alloy modifications (e.g., AZ91, LAE442 and WE43) and micro- and nanocoatings (e.g., MAO and MgF2), which are developed to improve the degradation rate required for long-term mechanical resistance to loading and excellent osseointegration with bone tissue, thereby promoting functional bone regeneration. Further research is required to deeply verify the safety and efficacy of Mg alloys.
Topics: Magnesium; Orthopedic Procedures; Orthopedics; Osteogenesis; Alloys
PubMed: 38203453
DOI: 10.3390/ijms25010282 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Aug 2020To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral bisphosphonates in increasing bone mineral density (BMD), reducing fractures, and improving clinical function in patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral bisphosphonates in increasing bone mineral density (BMD), reducing fractures, and improving clinical function in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI).
METHODS
Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized controlled trials of directly comparing oral bisphosphonate therapy with placebo-group in OI patients. Data synthesis regarding to bone mineral density as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), decreased fracture incidence, change in biochemical markers of bone and mineral metabolism, bone histology, growth, bone pain, quality of life, and others were assessed, and meta-analysis done when possible.
RESULTS
From 98 potential references and six randomized controlled studies a total of 263 participants receiving oral bisphosphonates and 143 placebo treatments contributed data to meta-analysis. Pooled meta-analysis of three studies suggested that there was significant difference between bisphosphonate treated group and placebo in number of patients with at least one fracture (mean difference 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.89, P = 0.02). Pooled meta-analysis of two studies suggested that significant difference was noted between bisphosphonate treated group and placebo in mean percentage change in spine BMD (T-score) (mean difference 28.43, 95% confidence interval 7.09-49.77, P = 0.009). The similar effect was shown in the term of mean change (Z-score) in spine BMD.
CONCLUSIONS
Significant improvement in lumbar areal BMD in patients affected with OI has been shown when treated with oral bisphosphonates, even though only a small population was enrolled. We cannot draw a definite conclusion that the increase in BMD can be translated into fracture reduction and clinical functional improvement. The optimal method, dose, type, initiation, and duration of oral bisphosphonates therapy still remains unclear. Well-designed, adequately-powered, placebo-controlled RCTs investigating the effects of oral bisphosphonates on fractures reduction and improvement in quality of life in both children and adults are studied here.
Topics: Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Osteogenesis Imperfecta; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32589343
DOI: 10.1111/os.12611 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2016Cleft lip and palate is one of the most common birth defects and can cause difficulties with feeding, speech and hearing, as well as psychosocial problems. Treatment of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cleft lip and palate is one of the most common birth defects and can cause difficulties with feeding, speech and hearing, as well as psychosocial problems. Treatment of orofacial clefts is prolonged; it typically commences after birth and lasts until the child reaches adulthood or even into adulthood. Residual deformities, functional disturbances, or both, are frequently seen in adults with a repaired cleft. Conventional orthognathic surgery, such as Le Fort I osteotomy, is often performed for the correction of maxillary hypoplasia. An alternative intervention is distraction osteogenesis, which achieves bone lengthening by gradual mechanical distraction.
OBJECTIVES
To provide evidence regarding the effects and long-term results of maxillary distraction osteogenesis compared to orthognathic surgery for the treatment of hypoplastic maxilla in people with cleft lip and palate.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 16 February 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 February 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 February 2016), LILACS BIREME (1982 to 16 February 2016), the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) (to 16 February 2016), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 16 February 2016). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the electronic searches. We performed handsearching of six speciality journals and we checked the reference lists of all trials identified for further studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing maxillary distraction osteogenesis to conventional Le Fort I osteotomy for the correction of cleft lip and palate maxillary hypoplasia in non-syndromic cleft patients aged 15 years or older.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed studies for eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for clarification or missing information whenever possible. All standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane were used.
MAIN RESULTS
We found six publications involving a total of 47 participants requiring maxillary advancement of 4 mm to 10 mm. All of them related to a single trial performed between 2002 and 2008 at the University of Hong Kong, but not all of the publications reported outcomes from all 47 participants. The study compared maxillary distraction osteogenesis with orthognathic surgery, and included participants from 13 to 45 years of age.Results and conclusions should be interpreted with caution given the fact that this was a single trial at high risk of bias, with a small sample size.The main outcomes assessed were hard and soft tissue changes, skeletal relapse, effects on speech and velopharyngeal function, psychological status, and clinical morbidities.Both interventions produced notable hard and soft tissue improvements. Nevertheless, the distraction group demonstrated a greater maxillary advancement, evaluated as the advancement of Subspinale A-point: a mean difference of 4.40 mm (95% CI 0.24 to 8.56) was recorded two years postoperatively.Horizontal relapse of the maxilla was significantly less in the distraction osteogenesis group five years after surgery. A total forward movement of A-point of 2.27 mm was noted for the distraction group, whereas a backward movement of 2.53 mm was recorded for the osteotomy group (mean difference 4.8 mm, 95% CI 0.41 to 9.19).No statistically significant differences could be detected between the groups in speech outcomes, when evaluated through resonance (hypernasality) at 17 months postoperatively (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.85) and nasal emissions at 17 months postoperatively (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 66.53), or in velopharyngeal function at the same time point (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.52).Maxillary distraction initially lowered social self-esteem at least until the distractors were removed, at three months postoperatively, compared to the osteotomy group, but this improved over time and the distraction group had higher satisfaction with life in the long term (two years after surgery) (MD 2.95, 95% CI 014 to 5.76).Adverse effects, in terms of clinical morbidities, included mainly occlusal relapse and mucosal infection, with the frequency being similar between groups (3/15 participants in the distraction osteogenesis group and 3/14 participants in the osteotomy group). There was no severe harm to any participant.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review found only one small randomised controlled trial concerning the effectiveness of distraction osteogenesis compared to conventional orthognathic surgery. The available evidence is of very low quality, which indicates that further research is likely to change the estimate of the effect. Based on measured outcomes, distraction osteogenesis may produce more satisfactory results; however, further prospective research comprising assessment of a larger sample size with participants with different facial characteristics is required to confirm possible true differences between interventions.
PubMed: 27689965
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010403.pub2 -
Systematic Reviews Nov 2023Symbrachydactyly is a rare congenital malformation of the hand characterized by short or even absent fingers with or without syndactyly, mostly unilaterally present. The...
Symbrachydactyly is a rare congenital malformation of the hand characterized by short or even absent fingers with or without syndactyly, mostly unilaterally present. The hand condition can vary from a small hand to only nubbins on the distal forearm. This study aims to systematically review the surgical management options for symbrachydactyly and compare functional and aesthetic outcomes.The review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Literature was systematically assessed searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and PROSPERO databases up to January 1, 2023. Studies were identified using synonyms for 'symbrachydactyly' and 'treatment'. Inclusion criteria were the report of outcomes after surgical treatment of symbrachydactyly in humans. Studies were excluded if they were written in another language than English, German, or French. Case reports, letters to the editor, studies on animals, cadaveric, in vitro studies, biomechanical reports, surgical technique description, and papers discussing traumatic or oncologic cases were excluded.Twenty-four studies published were included with 539 patients (1037 digit corrections). Only one study included and compared two surgical techniques. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and ranged from 25 to 47. The range of motion was the main reported outcome and demonstrated modest results in all surgical techniques. The report on aesthetics of the hand was limited in non-vascularized transfers to 2/8 studies and in vascularized transfers to 5/8 studies, both reporting satisfactory results. On average, there was a foot donor site complication rate of 22% in non-vascularized transfers, compared to 2% in vascularized transfers. The hand-related complication rate of 54% was much higher in the vascularized group than in the non-vascularized transfer with 16%.No uniform strategy to surgically improve symbrachydactyly exists. All discussed techniques show limited functional improvement with considerable complication rates, with the vascularized transfer showing relative high hand-related complications and the non-vascularized transfer showing relative high foot-related complications.There were no high-quality studies, and due to a lack of comparing studies, the data could only be analysed qualitatively. Systematic assessment of studies showed insufficient evidence to determine superiority of any procedure to treat symbrachydactyly due to inadequate study designs and comparative studies. This systematic review was registered at the National Institute for Health Research PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews number: CRD42020153590 and received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Level of evidenceI.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020153590.
PubMed: 37974291
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02362-7 -
Stem Cell Research & Therapy Jul 2021Over the past decades, many studies focused on mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) therapy for bone regeneration. Due to the efficiency of topical application has been widely... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Over the past decades, many studies focused on mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) therapy for bone regeneration. Due to the efficiency of topical application has been widely dicussed and systemic application was also a feasible way for new bone formation, the aim of this study was to systematically review systemic therapy of MSCs for bone regeneration in pre-clinical studies.
METHODS
The article search was conducted in PubMed and Embase databases. Original research articles that assessed potential effect of systemic application of MSCs for bone regeneration in vivo were selected and evaluated in this review, according to eligibility criteria. The efficacy of MSC systemic treatment was analyzed by random effects meta-analysis, and the outcomes were expressed in standard mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analyses were conducted on animal species and gender, MSCs types, frequency and time of injection, and bone diseases.
RESULTS
Twenty-three articles were selected in this review, of which 21 were included in meta-analysis. The results showed that systemic therapy increased bone mineral density (SMD 3.02 [1.84, 4.20]), bone volume to tissue volume ratio (2.10 [1.16, 3.03]), and the percentage of new bone area (7.03 [2.10, 11.96]). Bone loss caused by systemic disease tended to produce a better response to systemic treatment (p=0.05 in BMD, p=0.03 in BV/TV).
CONCLUSION
This study concluded that systemic therapy of MSCs promotes bone regeneration in preclinical experiments. These results provided important information for the systemic application of MSCs as a potential application of bone formation in further animal experiments.
Topics: Animals; Bone Regeneration; Bone and Bones; Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation; Mesenchymal Stem Cells; Osteogenesis
PubMed: 34215342
DOI: 10.1186/s13287-021-02456-w