ReviewAmerican journal of stem cells2024
Advancing dentin-pulp regeneration: clinical perspectives and insights from stem/progenitor cell transplantation (part II).
Review in American journal of stem cells, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bioactive molecule delivery platforms in regenerative endodontic therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cell transplantationPooled it
- Effect of Chitosan Nanoparticles as an Irrigant in Regenerative Endodontic Therapy of Necrotic Immature Permanent Teeth: An In Vivo Dog Model Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Regeneration Versus Granulation Tissue Healing in a Hopeless Mature Mandibular Molar Post-Endodontic Management: A 40-Month Follow-Up Case Report.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Biological markers and pulp pH values for the clinical prediction of suppurative pulpitis.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Concentration-dependent effects of modified triple antibiotic paste on human periodontal ligament stem cells and antibacterial efficacy: an in vitro study.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates clinical studies investigating regenerative endodontic procedures for mature/immature teeth utilizing stem cell transplantation. An electronic search of Scopus, PubMed, ISI Web Science, and Google Scholar was conducted up to January 2023. Outcome measures encompassed radiographic (periapical lesion, root length, apical foramen width, volume of the regenerated pulp) and clinical (post-operative pain, sensibility test) parameters. Among 3250 identified articles, five clinical studies were selected, comprising two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for mature/immature teeth, and three case reports/series for mature teeth. Despite the promising potential, the included studies exhibited a notable risk of bias. The diversity in stem cells (e.g., dental pulp stem cells [DPSCs], umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells [UC-MSCs]), scaffolds (Atecollagen, collagen membrane, platelet-poor plasma [PPP], leukocyte platelet-rich in fibrin [L-PRF]), and growth factors (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) emphasized the heterogeneity across interventions. In RCTs, DPSCs application increased root length and reduced apical foramen width in immature teeth, while UC-MSCs transplantation reduced apical lesions in mature teeth. Transplantation of DPSCs aggregates or UC-MSCs/PPP also elicited positive pulp responses and increased blood flow. In case reports/series, DPSCs application in teeth with irreversible pulpitis resulted in mineralization and increased the regenerated pulp' volume. Furthermore, transplantation of DPSCs with G-CSF/atelocollagen or L-PRF/collagen membrane led to positive pulp responses. While underscoring the potential of stem cell transplantation for regenerative endodontics in mature/immature teeth, the overall evidence quality and the limited number of available studies emphasize the need for cautious interpretation of results. Future well-designed clinical studies are essential to validate these findings further.
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.