Bovine-Derived Xenografts Immobilized With Cryopreserved Stem Cells From Human Adipose and Dental Pulp Tissues Promote Bone Regeneration: A Radiographic and Histological Study

Evaluating the efficacy of human dental pulp stem cells and scaffold combination for bone regeneration in animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Human adult dental pulp stem cells (hDPSC) and stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth (SHED) hold promise in bone regeneration for their easy accessibility, high proliferation rate, self-renewal and osteogenic differentiation capacity. Various organic and inorganic scaffold materials were pre-seeded with human dental pulp stem cells in animals, with promising outcomes in new bone formation. Nevertheless, the clinical trial for bone regeneration using dental pulp stem cells is still in its infancy. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to synthesise the evidence of the efficacy of human dental pulp stem cells and the scaffold combination for bone regeneration in animal bone defect models.

METHODOLOGY

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD2021274976), and PRISMA guideline was followed to include the relevant full-text papers using exclusion and inclusion criteria. Data were extracted for the systematic review. Quality assessment and the risk of bias were also carried out using the CAMARADES tool. Quantitative bone regeneration data of the experimental (scaffold + hDPSC/SHED) and the control (scaffold-only) groups were also extracted for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-nine papers were included for systematic review and only 27 of them were qualified for meta-analysis. 90% of the included papers were assessed as medium to low risk. In the meta-analysis, qualified studies were grouped by the unit of bone regeneration measurement. Overall, bone regeneration was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) in experimental group (scaffold + hDPSC/SHED) compared to the control group (scaffold-only) (SMD: 1.863, 95% CI 1.121-2.605). However, the effect is almost entirely driven by the % new bone formation group (SMD: 3.929, 95% CI 2.612-5.246) while % BV/TV (SMD: 2.693, 95% CI - 0.001-5.388) shows a marginal effect. Dogs and hydroxyapatite-containing scaffolds have the highest capacity in % new bone formation in response to human DPSC/SHED. The funnel plot exhibits no apparent asymmetry representing a lack of remarkable publication bias. Sensitivity analysis also indicated that the results generated in this meta-analysis are robust and reliable.

CONCLUSION

This is the first synthesised evidence showing that human DPSCs/SHED and scaffold combination enhanced bone regeneration highly significantly compared to the cell-free scaffold irrespective of scaffold type and animal species used. So, dental pulp stem cells could be a promising tool for treating various bone diseases, and more clinical trials need to be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of dental pulp stem cell-based therapies.

Dental pulp stem cells for reconstructing bone defects: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bone reconstruction with appropriate quality and quantity for dental implant replacement in the alveolar ridge is a challenge in dentistry. As dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) could be a new perspective in bone regeneration in the future, this study investigated the bone regeneration process by DPSCs.

METHODS

Electronic searches for articles in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were completed until 21 April 2022. The most important inclusion criteria for selecting in vivo studies reporting quantitative data based on new bone volume and new bone area. The quality assessment was performed based on Cochrane's checklist.

RESULTS

After the title, abstract, and full-text screening of 762 studies, 23 studies were included. A meta-analysis of 70 studies that reported bone regeneration based on new bone area showed a statistically significant favorable influence on bone tissue regeneration compared to the control groups (P<0.00001, standardized mean difference [SMD]=2.40, 95% CI: 1.55‒3.26; I2=83%). Also, the meta-analysis of 14 studies that reported new bone regeneration based on bone volume showed a statistically significant favorable influence on bone tissue regeneration compared to the control groups (P=0.0003, SMD=1.85, 95% CI: 0.85‒2.85; I2=84%).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review indicated that DPSCs in tissue regeneration therapy significantly affected bone tissue complex regeneration. However, more and less diverse preclinical studies will enable more powerful meta-analyses in the future.