Buccal fat pad‐derived stem cells with anorganic bovine bone mineral scaffold for augmentation of atrophic posterior mandible: An exploratory prospective clinical study. (1st March 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Khojasteh, Arash; Hosseinpour, Sepanta; Rezai Rad, Maryam; Alikhasi, Marzieh; Zadeh, Homayoun H.
• Is Part Of: Clinical implant dentistry and related research. Volume 21:Number 2(2019)
• Page Start: 292
• Page End: 300
• Publication Date: 2019-03-01
• Subjects: alveolar ridge augmentation -- atrophic posterior mandible -- buccal fat pad‐derived stem cells -- mesenchymal stem cells -- osteogenesis -- Tissue Engineering; Dental implants -- Periodicals; Dental Implantation -- Periodicals; Dental Implants -- Periodicals; 617.693
• DOI: 10.1111/cid.12729
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1523-0899

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Application of adipose‐derived stem cells originated from buccal fat pad (BFP) can simplify surgical procedures and diminish clinical risks compared to large autograft harvesting. Purpose: This study sought to evaluate and compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad‐derived stem cells (BFPSCs) in combination with anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM) for vertical and horizontal augmentation of atrophic posterior mandibles. Materials and Methods: Fourteen patients with atrophic posterior mandible were elected for this prospective exploratory study. BFP (3‐5 mL) was harvested and BFPSCs were isolated and combined with ABBM at 50% ratio. The vertical and horizontal alveolar deficiencies were augmented by 50% mixture of ABBM with either BFPSCs (group 1) or particulated autologous bone (group 2). Titanium mesh was contoured to the desired 3D shape of the alveolar ridge and fixated to the host sites over the graft material of the two groups. At first, the amount of new bone areas was calculated by quantitative analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images that were taken 6 months postoperatively according to regenerative techniques (group 1 vs group 2 without considering the type of bone defects). Second, these amounts were calculated in each group based on the type of defects. Results: Quantitative analysis of CBCT images revealed the areas of new bone formation were 169.5 ± 5.90 mm 2 and 166.75 ± 10.05 mm 2 in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The area of new bone formation for vertical defects were 164.91 ± 3.74 mm 2 and 169.36 ± 12.09 mm 2 in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The area of new bone formation for horizontal deficiencies were 170.51 ± 4.54 mm 2 and 166.98 ± 9.36 mm 2 in groups 1 and 2, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the pair‐wise comparisons ( P > 0.05). Conclusions: The findings of the present study demonstrated lack of difference in bone volume formation between BFPSCs and autologous particulate bone in combination with ABBM. If confirmed by future large‐scale clinical trial, BFPSCs may provide an alternative to autogenous bone for reconstruction of alveolar ridge defects.