ReviewStem cells international2026
Can Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improve Bone Regeneration in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Stem cells international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Can Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improve Bone Regeneration in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Stem cells international · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown promise in preclinical models for enhancing bone regeneration around dental implants. However, clinical evidence regarding their efficacy in maxillary sinus augmentation procedures for dental implants remains inconclusive. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of MSC-based regenerative therapies compared to conventional grafting in maxillary sinus augmentation for implant placement. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023488758). Electronic and gray literature searches were performed across six databases. Eligible studies included randomized clinical trials evaluating MSC-based bone regeneration in maxillary sinus lifts. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Meta-analyses were performed for implant success rate and bone formation outcomes. Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, comprising 74 patients and 222 implants. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in implant success rate between MSC and control groups (risk ratio [RR] = 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.03; Conclusions: MSC-based regenerative therapies do not appear to offer a significant clinical advantage over conventional grafting techniques in maxillary sinus augmentation. These results should be interpreted with caution, given the limited number of trials and clinical heterogeneity. Further well-designed studies are needed to validate their efficacy in implant-related bone regeneration.
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.