Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Research, Society and Development |
Texto Completo: | https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/19265 |
Resumo: | This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of bone marrow aspirate (BMA) to enhance bone repair in humans. Comprehensive survey of ramdomized clinical trials published up to June 2021 and listed in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Two reviewers independently searched eligible studies, made a final article selection, and extracted the data of the selected studies to evaluate it qualitatively. Overall, 13 studies were included in the review. Experimental models involved Posttraumatical aseptic nonunions of long bones of the upper limb, alveolar ridges following tooth extraction, atrophic mandibular fracture, benign bone lesions, bilateral tibial lengthening, fracture of intracapsular neck femur, maxillary horizontal ridge augmentation, non-traumatic femoral head necrosis, and sinus maxillary augmentation. The analyses included radiography, tomography, biopsies, and clinical evaluations. Ten studies reported enahanced bone formation (primary outcome) with combined use or not of BMA with other biomaterials and three studies found no benefit resulting from the use of BMA to treat bony defects. Secundary outcomes related to the healing process were also evaluated and positive, such as postoperative complications and pain visual analogue score. Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that BMA can improve the early stages of bone healing process. |
id |
UNIFEI_b7a0a1445f23b6359c9dd1e7f2cd8b27 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/19265 |
network_acronym_str |
UNIFEI |
network_name_str |
Research, Society and Development |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic reviewAspirado de médula ósea: una fuente viable de células madre para la regeneración ósea. Una revisión sistemáticaAspirado de medula óssea: uma fonte viável de células-tronco para regeneração óssea. Uma revisão sistemáticaBone marrowBone regenerationBoneSystematic reviewStem cells.Médula óseaRegeneración óseaHuesoRevisión sistemáticaCélulas madre.Medula ósseaRegeneração ósseaOssoRevisão sistemáticaCélulas-tronco.This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of bone marrow aspirate (BMA) to enhance bone repair in humans. Comprehensive survey of ramdomized clinical trials published up to June 2021 and listed in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Two reviewers independently searched eligible studies, made a final article selection, and extracted the data of the selected studies to evaluate it qualitatively. Overall, 13 studies were included in the review. Experimental models involved Posttraumatical aseptic nonunions of long bones of the upper limb, alveolar ridges following tooth extraction, atrophic mandibular fracture, benign bone lesions, bilateral tibial lengthening, fracture of intracapsular neck femur, maxillary horizontal ridge augmentation, non-traumatic femoral head necrosis, and sinus maxillary augmentation. The analyses included radiography, tomography, biopsies, and clinical evaluations. Ten studies reported enahanced bone formation (primary outcome) with combined use or not of BMA with other biomaterials and three studies found no benefit resulting from the use of BMA to treat bony defects. Secundary outcomes related to the healing process were also evaluated and positive, such as postoperative complications and pain visual analogue score. Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that BMA can improve the early stages of bone healing process.Esta revisión sistemática evaluó la efectividad del aspirado de médula ósea (AMO) para mejorar la reparación ósea en humanos. Encuesta exhaustiva de ensayos clínicos aleatorios publicados hasta junio de 2021 y enumerados en las bases de datos de PubMed / MEDLINE, EMBASE y Cochrane Library siguiendo la declaración Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA). Dos revisores buscaron de forma independiente los estudios elegibles, seleccionaron el artículo final y extrajeron los datos de los estudios seleccionados para evaluarlos cualitativamente. En general, se incluyeron 13 estudios en la revisión. Modelos experimentales implicados Seudoartrosis aséptica postraumática de huesos largos del miembro superior, crestas alveolares después de extracción dentaria, fractura atrófica mandibular, lesiones óseas benignas, alargamiento tibial bilateral, fractura del fémur del cuello intracapsular, aumento del reborde horizontal maxilar, necrosis de la cabeza femoral no traumática, y aumento del seno maxilar. Los análisis incluyeron radiografías, tomografías, biopsias y evaluaciones clínicas. Diez estudios informaron una mejora en la formación de hueso (resultado primario) con el uso combinado o no de AMO con otros biomateriales y tres estudios no encontraron ningún beneficio como resultado del uso de AMO para tratar defectos óseos. Los resultados secundarios relacionados con el proceso de curación también se evaluaron y fueron positivos, como las complicaciones posoperatorias y la puntuación analógica visual del dolor. Dentro de los límites del presente estudio, se puede concluir que BMA puede mejorar las primeras etapas del proceso de curación ósea.Esta revisão sistemática avaliou a eficácia do aspirado de medula óssea (AMO) para melhorar o reparo ósseo em humanos. Pesquisa abrangente de ensaios clínicos ramificados publicados até junho de 2021 e listados nos bancos de dados PubMed / MEDLINE, EMBASE e Cochrane Library seguindo a declaração de itens de relatório preferidos para revisões sistemáticas e meta-análises (PRISMA). Dois revisores pesquisaram independentemente estudos elegíveis, fizeram uma seleção final do artigo e extraíram os dados dos estudos selecionados para avaliá-los qualitativamente. No geral, 13 estudos foram incluídos na revisão. Modelos experimentais envolveram não união asséptica pós-traumática de ossos longos do membro superior, cristas alveolares após extração de dente, fratura mandibular atrófica, lesões ósseas benignas, alongamento tibial bilateral, fratura de fêmur do colo intracapsular, aumento da crista horizontal maxilar, necrose da cabeça femoral não traumática, e aumento do seio maxilar. As análises incluíram radiografia, tomografia, biópsias e avaliações clínicas. Dez estudos relataram formação óssea aprimorada (desfecho primário) com o uso combinado ou não de AMO com outros biomateriais e três estudos não encontraram nenhum benefício resultante do uso de AMO para tratar defeitos ósseos. Desfechos secundários relacionados ao processo de cicatrização também foram avaliados e positivos, como complicações pós-operatórias e escore visual analógico de dor. Dentro dos limites do presente estudo, pode-se concluir que a AMO pode melhorar as fases iniciais do processo de consolidação óssea.Research, Society and Development2021-08-24info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/1926510.33448/rsd-v10i11.19265Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 11; e94101119265Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 11; e94101119265Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 11; e941011192652525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIenghttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/19265/17298Copyright (c) 2021 Carolina dos Santos Santinoni; Yara Loyanne de Almeida Silva Levi; João Paulo Pelágio Toneto; João Augusto Cazuza; Luciana Prado Maia; Fellippo Ramos Verrihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSantinoni, Carolina dos Santos Levi, Yara Loyanne de Almeida Silva Toneto, João Paulo Pelágio Cazuza, João Augusto Maia, Luciana Prado Verri, Fellippo Ramos 2021-10-23T19:01:11Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/19265Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:39:11.806516Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review Aspirado de médula ósea: una fuente viable de células madre para la regeneración ósea. Una revisión sistemática Aspirado de medula óssea: uma fonte viável de células-tronco para regeneração óssea. Uma revisão sistemática |
title |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
spellingShingle |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review Santinoni, Carolina dos Santos Bone marrow Bone regeneration Bone Systematic review Stem cells. Médula ósea Regeneración ósea Hueso Revisión sistemática Células madre. Medula óssea Regeneração óssea Osso Revisão sistemática Células-tronco. |
title_short |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
title_full |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
title_fullStr |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
title_sort |
Bone marrow aspirate: a viable source of stem cells for bone regeneration. A systematic review |
author |
Santinoni, Carolina dos Santos |
author_facet |
Santinoni, Carolina dos Santos Levi, Yara Loyanne de Almeida Silva Toneto, João Paulo Pelágio Cazuza, João Augusto Maia, Luciana Prado Verri, Fellippo Ramos |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Levi, Yara Loyanne de Almeida Silva Toneto, João Paulo Pelágio Cazuza, João Augusto Maia, Luciana Prado Verri, Fellippo Ramos |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Santinoni, Carolina dos Santos Levi, Yara Loyanne de Almeida Silva Toneto, João Paulo Pelágio Cazuza, João Augusto Maia, Luciana Prado Verri, Fellippo Ramos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Bone marrow Bone regeneration Bone Systematic review Stem cells. Médula ósea Regeneración ósea Hueso Revisión sistemática Células madre. Medula óssea Regeneração óssea Osso Revisão sistemática Células-tronco. |
topic |
Bone marrow Bone regeneration Bone Systematic review Stem cells. Médula ósea Regeneración ósea Hueso Revisión sistemática Células madre. Medula óssea Regeneração óssea Osso Revisão sistemática Células-tronco. |
description |
This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of bone marrow aspirate (BMA) to enhance bone repair in humans. Comprehensive survey of ramdomized clinical trials published up to June 2021 and listed in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Two reviewers independently searched eligible studies, made a final article selection, and extracted the data of the selected studies to evaluate it qualitatively. Overall, 13 studies were included in the review. Experimental models involved Posttraumatical aseptic nonunions of long bones of the upper limb, alveolar ridges following tooth extraction, atrophic mandibular fracture, benign bone lesions, bilateral tibial lengthening, fracture of intracapsular neck femur, maxillary horizontal ridge augmentation, non-traumatic femoral head necrosis, and sinus maxillary augmentation. The analyses included radiography, tomography, biopsies, and clinical evaluations. Ten studies reported enahanced bone formation (primary outcome) with combined use or not of BMA with other biomaterials and three studies found no benefit resulting from the use of BMA to treat bony defects. Secundary outcomes related to the healing process were also evaluated and positive, such as postoperative complications and pain visual analogue score. Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that BMA can improve the early stages of bone healing process. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-24 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/19265 10.33448/rsd-v10i11.19265 |
url |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/19265 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.33448/rsd-v10i11.19265 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/19265/17298 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 11; e94101119265 Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 11; e94101119265 Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 11; e94101119265 2525-3409 reponame:Research, Society and Development instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) instacron:UNIFEI |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
instacron_str |
UNIFEI |
institution |
UNIFEI |
reponame_str |
Research, Society and Development |
collection |
Research, Society and Development |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
rsd.articles@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1797052686971961344 |