Vol 19, No 4 (2024)

Background and Objectives:Periodontium is an important tooth-supporting tissue composed of both hard (alveolar bone and cementum) and soft (gingival and periodontal ligament) sections. Due to the multi-tissue architecture of periodontium, reconstruction of each part can be influenced by others. This review focuses on the bone section of the periodontium and presents the materials used in tissue engineering scaffolds for its reconstruction.

Materials and Methods:The following databases (2015 to 2021) were electronically searched: ProQuest, EMBASE, SciFinder, MRS Online Proceedings Library, Medline, and Compendex. The search was limited to English-language publications and in vivo studies.

Results:Eighty-three articles were found in primary searching. After applying the inclusion criteria, seventeen articles were incorporated into this study.

Conclusions:In complex periodontal defects, various types of scaffolds, including multilayered ones, have been used for the functional reconstruction of different parts of periodontium. While there are some multilayered scaffolds designed to regenerate alveolar bone/periodontal ligament/cementum tissues of periodontium in a hierarchically organized construct, no scaffold could so far consider all four tissues involved in a complete periodontal defect. The progress and material considerations in the regeneration of the bony part of periodontium are presented in this work to help investigators develop tissue engineering scaffolds suitable for complete periodontal regeneration.

Introduction:Tooth loss is a significant health issue. Currently, this situation is often treated with the use of synthetic materials such as implants and prostheses. However, these treatment modalities do not fully meet patients' biological and mechanical needs and have limited longevity. Regenerative medicine focuses on the restoration of patients' natural tissues via tissue engineering techniques instead of rehabilitating with artificial appliances. Therefore, a tissue-engineered tooth regeneration strategy seems like a promising option to treat tooth loss.

Objective:This review aims to demonstrate recent advances in tooth regeneration strategies and discoveries about underlying mechanisms and pathways of tooth formation

Results and Discussion:Whole tooth regeneration, tooth root formation, and dentin-pulp organoid generation have been achieved by using different seed cells and various materials for scaffold production. Bioactive agents are critical elements for the induction of cells into odontoblast or ameloblast lineage. Some substantial pathways enrolled in tooth development have been figured out, helping researchers design their experiments more effectively and aligned with the natural process of tooth formation.

Conclusion:According to current knowledge, tooth regeneration is possible in case of proper selection of stem cells, appropriate design and manufacturing of a biocompatible scaffold, and meticulous application of bioactive agents for odontogenic induction. Understanding innate odontogenesis pathways play a crucial role in accurately planning regenerative therapeutic interventions in order to reproduce teeth.

Introduction:To evaluate the biological interaction between dental stem cells (DSCs) and different growth factors in the field of regenerative endodontics.

Methods:A systematic search was conducted in the electronic databases up to October 2021. This study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Ex vivo studies evaluating the biological interactions of DSCs and growth factors were included. The meta-analysis was performed according to the type of growth factor. The outcomes were cell viability/ proliferation and mineralization. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were estimated using the random-effect maximum-likelihood method (P < .05). Additional analysis was performed to find any potential source of heterogeneity.

Results:Twenty articles were included in the systematic review; meta-analysis was performed for fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) and Transforming growth factor-ß1 (TGF-β1) (n = 5). Results showed that use of FGF-2 significantly increased cell proliferation on day 1-(SMD = 3.56, P = 0.00), 3-(SMD = 9.04, P = 0.00), 5-(SMD = 8.37, P = 0.01), and 7 (SMD=8.51, P=0.00) than the control group. TGF-ß1 increased alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity more than control only on day 3 (SMD = 3.68, P = 0.02). TGF-β1 had no significant effect on cell proliferation on days 1 and 3 (P > 0.05) and on ALP activity on days 5 and 7 (P > 0.05). Meta-regression analysis showed that different covariates (i.e., cell type, passage number, and growth factors' concentration) could significantly influence the effect sizes at different follow- ups (p < 0.05).

Conclusion:Specific growth factors might enhance the proliferation and mineralization of DSCs; however, the obtained evidence was weak. Due to the high heterogeneity among the included studies, other growth factors' inhibitory/stimulatory effects on DSCs could not be evaluated.

Background:Photobiomodulation therapy involves exposing tissues to light sources, including light-emitting diodes or low-level lasers, which results in cellular function modulation. The molecular mechanism of this treatment is revealed, demonstrating that depending on the light settings utilized, it has the potential to elicit both stimulatory and inhibitory reactions.

Objective:The current systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of photobiomodulation therapy on dental stem cells and provide an evidence-based conclusion in this regard.

Methods:This systematic review was performed and reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) revised guidelines. PICO(S) components were employed to define the inclusion criteria. Web of Science, Scopus, Medline as well as grey literature, and google scholar were searched up to September 2021 to retrieve relevant papers.

Results:Photobiomodulation therapy showed promising effects on the proliferation, viability, and differentiation of dental stem cells. This finding was based on reviewing related articles with a low risk of bias.

Conclusion:Despite the positive benefits of photobiomodulation therapy on dental stem cells, the current data do not provide a definitive conclusion on the best physical parameters for enhancing cell viability, proliferation, and differentiation.

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.