Reference Stem cell type Colection Subculture Origin Carrier Defect type Graft location Cover Control Time for analysis Analysis Primary outcomes Implants Restoration Follow-up after restoration Implant survival rate Complications
Da Costa et al. [18 ] MSC BMA No (whole aspirate) IB 5 + 5 AB Horizontal AM NO AB 6 m CT + Hm Alveolar thickness gain: 4.6 ± 1.43 versus 2.15 ± 0.47 mm (test versus control); vital bone: 60.7 ± 16.18 versus 41.4 ± 12.5% (test versus control) Yes (40) Yes N/S 100% N/S Gimbel et al. [19 ] N/S BMA No (whole aspirate) IB 21 tests + 25 controls CS Cleft palate AM NO IB 1 d, 1 w, 3 w, 6 w, 6 m Comfort and complications for donor site Best results in test group followed by conventional iliac graft No No N/A N/A Test: 2 granulation tissues; control: 1 oronasal fistula Gonshor et al. [15 ] MSC CBA No N/S
18: 8 bilats + 10 unilats (=26) CBA Sinus lift PM NO Allograft 3.6 ± 0.6 m H + Hm + CT Vital bone: 32.5 ± 6.8% (test) - 18.3 ± 10.6% (control) Yes No N/S N/S 2 patients lost Kaigler et al. [20 ] MSC BMA Yes (automated Ixmyelocel-T) IB 12 + 12 CS Alveolar reconstruction M and Mn CM CS + CM 6 or 12 w RX + μ CT + H Linear bone height: 55.3%–78.9 (6 w, control versus test); 74.6%–80.1% (12 w, control versus test) Yes Yes 1 year N/S N/S Pelegrine et al. [21 ] MSC BMA No (whole aspirate) IB 15 + 15 No Alveolar reconstruction AM NO No graft 6 m Clinical data + H + Hm Horizontal bone loss: 1.14 ± 0.87 versus 2.46 ± 0.4 mm (test versus control); vertical bone loss: 1.17 ± 0.26 mm versus 0.62 ± 0.51 mm (test versus control); new vital bone: 45.47±7.21 versus 42.87 ± 11.33% Yes (20) Yes N/S 100% 5 control sites required regraft at implant placement Rickert et al. [16 ] MNC BMA No (BMAC) IB 12 split mouths (24 sinuses) BBM Sinus lift PM CM BBM + retromolar autogenous graft 14.8 ± 0.7 w Hm New bone (test versus control): 17.7 ± 7.3% versus 12.0 ± 6.6% Yes (66 nonsubmerged) Yes N/S N/S 3 implant failures Sauerbier et al. [22 ] MSC BMA No (BMAC) IB 7 patients (12 sites; test) + 4 (6; control) BBM Sinus lift PM CM FICOLL 3 m H + Hm Similar results for all parameters Yes Yes 1 y 98% 1 implant lost in the test group Sauerbier et al. [17 ] MSC BMA No (BMAC) IB 26 patients (45 sinuses) 34 tests/11 controls BBM Sinus lift PM CM BBM + Retromolar Autogenous graft 3.46 ± 0.43 m test/3.34 ± 0.42 m control CT + H + Hm Radiographic volume gain: 1.74 ± 0.69 versus 1.33 ± 0.62 mL (test versus control); new bone formation: 12.6 ± 1.7 versus 14.3 ± 1.8% No No N/S N/A 1 inferior alveolar nerve injury during autogenous graft harvesting Wojtowicz et al. [23 ] MNC BMA Nonprocessed BMA, CD34+ cells isolated from BMA or PRP IB 17 (9 CD34+/4 BMA/4 PRP) BBM Cystectomy AMn FM + CM No graft 1 & 3 m RX Similar trabeculae to nonregenerated bone in BMA and CD34+ groups No No N/S N/A N/S
