BioResearch open access · 2014
Follow-up of implant survival comparing ficoll and bone marrow aspirate concentrate methods for hard tissue regeneration with mesenchymal stem cells in humans.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Duttenhoefer Fabian, Hieber Stefan F, Stricker Andres, Schmelzeisen Rainer, Gutwald Ralf, Sauerbier Sebastian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Clinical follow-up of implant survival in 11 patients comparing two different methods for mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) isolation (Ficoll and bone marrow aspirate concentrate [BMAC]) applied in maxillary sinus augmentation.
METHODS: Mononuclear cells, including MSCs, were concentrated with either Ficoll (control group, n=6 sinus) or BMAC (test group, n=12 sinus) and transplanted in combination with bovine bone mineral. A total of 50 implants were placed in a second surgical intervention (17 Ficoll/33 BMAC) and loaded after 4 months. Overall implant survival was assessed with a Kaplan-Meier model using package survival under R.
RESULTS: Implant survival of the Ficoll group was 100% compared with the BMAC group, which had 93.4% survival (95% confidence interval, 0.849-1). The difference between the groups was not significant (p=0.381).
CONCLUSION: The BMAC system is an effective and suitable "chair-side" method for clinical application in hard tissue regeneration.
METHODS: Mononuclear cells, including MSCs, were concentrated with either Ficoll (control group, n=6 sinus) or BMAC (test group, n=12 sinus) and transplanted in combination with bovine bone mineral. A total of 50 implants were placed in a second surgical intervention (17 Ficoll/33 BMAC) and loaded after 4 months. Overall implant survival was assessed with a Kaplan-Meier model using package survival under R.
RESULTS: Implant survival of the Ficoll group was 100% compared with the BMAC group, which had 93.4% survival (95% confidence interval, 0.849-1). The difference between the groups was not significant (p=0.381).
CONCLUSION: The BMAC system is an effective and suitable "chair-side" method for clinical application in hard tissue regeneration.