{"title":"使用不同生物支架对人类未成熟牙进行再生牙髓治疗的临床、放射学和组织学结果:系统综述与元分析》。","authors":"Mohammadreza Vatankhah, Shaghayegh Najary, Omid Dianat","doi":"10.2174/1574888X17666220903141155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Biological scaffolds such as blood clot (BC), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet- rich fibrin (PRF), and platelet pellet (PP) are used in regenerative endodontic treatments (RETs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically and quantitatively evaluate clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes of RET studies using different biological scaffolds.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Embase were searched to identify studies on RET procedures with any scaffold type performed on immature non-vital human teeth, employing any type of biological scaffold. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes were extracted. Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for quality assessment. Random and fixed model meta-analysis was carried out with 95% confidence interval.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two studies were included in the qualitative analysis from the primarily retrieved 1895 studies. Only one study had high risk of bias and 71.8% of the studies had high quality. None of the studies reported any histologic findings. Thirty studies were included in meta-analysis. Clinical success rate of RET using either BC, PRP, or PRF was >99%. Furthermore, 32%, 23%, and 27% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases regained vitality, respectively. Periapical healing was seen in 67%, 75%, and 100% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases, respectively. There was no statistical difference between BC, PRP, or PRF regarding clinical success or any radiographic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no significant difference between BC, PRP, and PRF in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes. When it is difficult or dangerous to induce bleeding in root canals, PRP and PRF may be employed instead.</p>","PeriodicalId":10979,"journal":{"name":"Current stem cell research & therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical, Radiographic, and Histologic Outcomes of Regenerative Endodontic Treatment in Human Immature Teeth Using Different Biological Scaffolds: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammadreza Vatankhah, Shaghayegh Najary, Omid Dianat\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1574888X17666220903141155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Biological scaffolds such as blood clot (BC), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet- rich fibrin (PRF), and platelet pellet (PP) are used in regenerative endodontic treatments (RETs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically and quantitatively evaluate clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes of RET studies using different biological scaffolds.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Embase were searched to identify studies on RET procedures with any scaffold type performed on immature non-vital human teeth, employing any type of biological scaffold. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes were extracted. Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for quality assessment. Random and fixed model meta-analysis was carried out with 95% confidence interval.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two studies were included in the qualitative analysis from the primarily retrieved 1895 studies. Only one study had high risk of bias and 71.8% of the studies had high quality. None of the studies reported any histologic findings. Thirty studies were included in meta-analysis. Clinical success rate of RET using either BC, PRP, or PRF was >99%. Furthermore, 32%, 23%, and 27% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases regained vitality, respectively. Periapical healing was seen in 67%, 75%, and 100% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases, respectively. There was no statistical difference between BC, PRP, or PRF regarding clinical success or any radiographic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no significant difference between BC, PRP, and PRF in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes. When it is difficult or dangerous to induce bleeding in root canals, PRP and PRF may be employed instead.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current stem cell research & therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current stem cell research & therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1574888X17666220903141155\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current stem cell research & therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1574888X17666220903141155","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical, Radiographic, and Histologic Outcomes of Regenerative Endodontic Treatment in Human Immature Teeth Using Different Biological Scaffolds: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Background: Biological scaffolds such as blood clot (BC), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet- rich fibrin (PRF), and platelet pellet (PP) are used in regenerative endodontic treatments (RETs).
Objective: To systematically and quantitatively evaluate clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes of RET studies using different biological scaffolds.
Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Embase were searched to identify studies on RET procedures with any scaffold type performed on immature non-vital human teeth, employing any type of biological scaffold. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic outcomes were extracted. Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for quality assessment. Random and fixed model meta-analysis was carried out with 95% confidence interval.
Results: Thirty-two studies were included in the qualitative analysis from the primarily retrieved 1895 studies. Only one study had high risk of bias and 71.8% of the studies had high quality. None of the studies reported any histologic findings. Thirty studies were included in meta-analysis. Clinical success rate of RET using either BC, PRP, or PRF was >99%. Furthermore, 32%, 23%, and 27% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases regained vitality, respectively. Periapical healing was seen in 67%, 75%, and 100% of BC, PRP, and PRF cases, respectively. There was no statistical difference between BC, PRP, or PRF regarding clinical success or any radiographic outcomes.
Conclusion: There was no significant difference between BC, PRP, and PRF in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes. When it is difficult or dangerous to induce bleeding in root canals, PRP and PRF may be employed instead.
期刊介绍:
Current Stem Cell Research & Therapy publishes high quality frontier reviews, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited issues on all aspects of basic research on stem cells and their uses in clinical therapy. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians involved in stem cells research.