ArticleOdontology2026
Comparison of the effects of different dental pulp stem cell preconditioning protocols on the odontogenic potential of their derived small extracellular vesicles.
Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Regenerative endodontic therapy that is based on the use of stem cells or their derivatives to induce dentin-pulp complex regeneration has recently gained substantial interest. This study aimed to compare the effect of preconditioning through odontogenesis (OD) and/or low-level laser therapy photobiostimulation (LLLT) of human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs) on the regenerative potentials of their derived small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) aiming to develop a novel pulp capping therapy. In the current study, hDPSCs were subjected to OD, LLLT, or dual preconditioning protocols before the isolation of sEVs, then the derived sEVs were co-cultured with naïve hDPSCs. Cell viability and wound healing capacity were evaluated using MTT and scratch assays, respectively. RT-qPCR was performed for odontogenic gene expression (DSPP, DMP1, and COL1A1), followed by immunocytochemical staining. Matrix mineralization was also assessed, and relevant statistical analyses were performed. All sEVs-treated groups revealed enhanced cellular and odontogenic activities. OD-sEVs enhanced wound healing and mineralization, while LLLT-sEVs showed relatively higher viability, odontogenic gene and protein expression levels. However, no significant differences were detected between both groups. The novel dual preconditioning protocol surpassed either treatment alone representing a promising approach for odontogenic induction of mesenchymal stem cells. The results highlighted the regenerative potential of preconditioned sEVs as a biological, promising pulp capping material that could open new avenues in the field of regenerative endodontic treatment after being tested in-vivo in experimental animals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42830350What 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.