Scholarlink

<p>Stem cell-based therapies have emerged as promising strategies for periodontal regeneration. This review systematically evaluates the efficacy and safety of stem cell-based therapies, including periodontal ligament, dental pulp, gingival, bone marrow, and other mesenchymal stem cells for advanced periodontal regeneration. The objective was to assess regenerative outcomes of stem cells compared to conventional treatments. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science, plus additional sources as applicable, up to 2024 December. Studies were included if they utilized stem cell-based interventions aimed at periodontal regeneration with specified outcomes and study designs (e.g., RCTs, controlled preclinical trials). Two independent reviewers screened articles. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was done and the clinical outcomes and risk of bias were interpreted. Meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (PROSPERO ID.: CRD420251132434.). Nine clinical studies met inclusion. Pooled analysis demonstrated significant improvements with stem cell therapies: clinical attachment level (CAL) gain of 2.02&#xa0;mm, probing depth (PD) reduction of 2.71&#xa0;mm, and bone fill of 46.1%. Heterogeneity was moderate across outcomes (<i>I</i><sup>2</sup> range: 36–47%). GRADE assessment rated evidence certainty as moderate for CAL and PD, and low for bone fill. Stem cell-based approaches have great potential to transform periodontal regeneration compared with conventional methods, particularly in CAL gain, PD reduction, and bone fill. However, evidence remains limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols, and short follow-up. Well-designed, multicenter RCTs with standardized protocols and extended follow-up durations are needed to confirm the long-term efficacy and safety.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Stem cells as a therapeutic frontier for advanced periodontal regeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月24日

查看全文
  • Saketha Vallabhaneni,
  • Naga Surya Ganesh Vankayala,
  • Mudita Chaturvedi,
  • P. Mohan Kumar,
  • K. Nishant,
  • Raghavendra Reddy Nagate,
  • Shankar T. Gokhale,
  • Mohamed Fadul A. Elagib,
  • Shreyas Tikare,
  • Tushar Vitthalrao Bhagat,
  • Saurabh Chaturvedi

摘要

Stem cell-based therapies have emerged as promising strategies for periodontal regeneration. This review systematically evaluates the efficacy and safety of stem cell-based therapies, including periodontal ligament, dental pulp, gingival, bone marrow, and other mesenchymal stem cells for advanced periodontal regeneration. The objective was to assess regenerative outcomes of stem cells compared to conventional treatments. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science, plus additional sources as applicable, up to 2024 December. Studies were included if they utilized stem cell-based interventions aimed at periodontal regeneration with specified outcomes and study designs (e.g., RCTs, controlled preclinical trials). Two independent reviewers screened articles. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was done and the clinical outcomes and risk of bias were interpreted. Meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (PROSPERO ID.: CRD420251132434.). Nine clinical studies met inclusion. Pooled analysis demonstrated significant improvements with stem cell therapies: clinical attachment level (CAL) gain of 2.02 mm, probing depth (PD) reduction of 2.71 mm, and bone fill of 46.1%. Heterogeneity was moderate across outcomes (I2 range: 36–47%). GRADE assessment rated evidence certainty as moderate for CAL and PD, and low for bone fill. Stem cell-based approaches have great potential to transform periodontal regeneration compared with conventional methods, particularly in CAL gain, PD reduction, and bone fill. However, evidence remains limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols, and short follow-up. Well-designed, multicenter RCTs with standardized protocols and extended follow-up durations are needed to confirm the long-term efficacy and safety.