Healing of large periapical lesions following delivery of dental stem cells with an injectable scaffold: New method and three case reports.

Regenerative endodontics is the creation and delivery of tissues to replace diseased, missing, and traumatized pulp. A call for a paradigm shift and new protocol for the clinical management of these cases has been brought to attention. These regenerative endodontic techniques will possibly involve some combination of disinfection or debridement of infected root canal systems with apical enlargement to permit revascularization and use of stem cells, scaffolds, and growth factors. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been isolated from the pulp tissue of permanent teeth (dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs)) and deciduous teeth (stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth). Stem cells are characterized as multipotent cells for regeneration.These three case reports describe the treatment of necrotic or immature teeth with periradicular periodontitis, which was not treated with conventional apexification techniques. All cases presented here developed mature apices and bone healing after 3 to 4 months after the initial treatment without complications, and faster than traditional treatments. Our clinical observations support a shifting paradigm toward a biologic approach by providing a favorable environment for tissue regeneration. The mechanism of this continued development and formation of the root end and faster tissue healing is discussed.

Coronally advanced flap in combination with acellular dermal matrix with or without enamel matrix derivatives for root coverage.

Background: Coverage of gingival recession defects has been considered as a subject of interest for dental practitioners. Aim: The present study was aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of root coverage (RC) procedures, using coronally advanced flap (CAF) in combination with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) with or without enamel matrix derivatives (EMD). Materials and Methods: A total of 36 Miller class I or II recession defects in 15 eligible patients were selected. The defects were randomly allocated to test (CAF+ADM+EMD) and control (CAF+ADM) groups. Recession depth (RD), recession width (RW), width of keratinized tissue (WKT), clinical attachment level (CAL), and the position of mucogingival junction (MGJ) were measured at baseline, two and six months after treatment. Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and paired sample t-test with the patients as statistical unit. Results: At two-month follow-up, the mean RC for CAF+ADM+EMD and CAF+ADM was 82.75 ± 22 and 88.89 ± 22 percent, respectively. However, these values did not change significantly after six months. Both treatments led to significant RC (P < 0.001), whereas no significant differences were observed in WKT, CAL, and MGJ between the study groups. Conclusion: The application of EMD does not improve the clinical efficacy of ADM in combination with CAF in RC procedures.