ArticleScientific reports2019
Success rates in isolating mesenchymal stem cells from permanent and deciduous teeth.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Recombinant Human Amelogenin on the Osteogenic Differentiation Potential of SHED.Cells · 2025Article
- Investigation of Angiogenic Potential in CD146-Positive Stem Cells Derived from Human Exfoliated Deciduous Teeth.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Towards Stem Cell Therapy for Critical-Sized Segmental Bone Defects: Current Trends and Challenges on the Path to Clinical Translation.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Review
- Dental Pulp Stem Cells for Salivary Gland Regeneration-Where Are We Today?International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Bone Differentiation Ability of CD146-Positive Stem Cells from Human Exfoliated Deciduous Teeth.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Isolation and cultivation as well asFrontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Review
- Isolation and Characterization of Buccal Fat Pad and Dental Pulp MSCs from the Same Donor.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Comparison of stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous posterior teeth with varying levels of root resorption.Stem cell investigation · 2021Article
- Improved Cell Properties of Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells (hDPSCs) Isolated and Expanded in a GMP Compliant and Xenogeneic Serum-free Medium.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth (SHED) and human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs) have emerged as attractive cell sources for bone regeneration. However, the specific teeth and the conditions most suitable for stem cell isolation remain unclear. Therefore, the success rate of SHED and hDPSCs isolation, the patient age and remaining root length in deciduous teeth were evaluated. Successful isolation was defined as when the cell culture was maintained up to the third passage without any contamination or other issues. Remaining tooth length was calculated using the root-to-crown ratio from patient X-rays and compared to the norm value from the literature. The overall successful isolation rate of SHED and hDPSCs was 82% and 70%. The average patient ages at extraction of the deciduous teeth and permanent teeth were 11 years and 9 months, and 22 years and 10 months respectively. In the successful SHED group, the average remaining root length of the anterior deciduous teeth was 71.4%, and that of the deciduous molars was 61.4%. Successful isolation appears to be associated with patient age, length of the remaining root, and also mechanical stress and other factors. Tooth selection criteria need to be identified to improve the success rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.