Clinical, Radiographic, and Histologic Outcomes of Regenerative Endodontic Treatment in Human Immature Teeth Using Different Biological Scaffolds: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author:

Dianat Omid1ORCID,Vatankhah Mohammadreza2ORCID,Najary Shaghayegh3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Endodontics, Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

2. Iranian Center for Endodontic Research, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3. Students\' Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

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.

Publisher

Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.

Subject

General Medicine,Medicine (miscellaneous)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3