Primary study · included by 3 reviews

Stem cell therapy for reconstruction of alveolar cleft and trauma defects in adults: A randomized controlled, clinical trial.

Bajestan 2017 · Bajestan Mona N, Rajan Archana, Edwards Sean P, et al. · Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2017

Included by

Can Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improve Bone Regeneration in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Bajestan 2017 · Table 1; References 49-54
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
log RR -0.03 [-0.09, 0.04]4 studiesGRADE not reported
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
log RR -0.03 [-0.10, 0.04]4 studiesGRADE not reported
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft) · Follow-up 3 to 12 months
RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.03]5 studies · 222 implants participantsModerate
Bone regeneration (continuous)
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration vs Conventional grafting without stem cells (DBBM, autograft, allograft or blood clot)
SMD -0.83 [-1.37, -0.30]2 studiesHigh
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
log RR -0.01 [-0.06, 0.03]4 studiesGRADE not reported
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
log RR -0.03 [-0.10, 0.04]4 studiesGRADE not reported
Bone regeneration (bone neoformation, continuous)
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
SMD -0.84 [-1.36, -0.32]2 studies · 60 participantsHigh
Implant success rate
Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based bone regeneration (MSC with biomaterial or cellular allograft) vs Bone regeneration without stem cells (e.g., biomaterial or autograft alone, blood clot, particulate allograft)
log RR -0.00 [-0.05, 0.04]4 studiesGRADE not reported
Clinical stem cell therapy in oral and craniofacial bone regeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Bajestan et al. 2017 · Table 2, Table 4

The review does not say which of its outcomes this study informs.

Emerging, personalized, and minimally invasive technologies for periodontal and peri-implant soft and hard tissue regenerative therapy.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Bajestan 2017 · Results: scaffold-based bone regeneration; reference 153

The review does not say which of its outcomes this study informs.

3 including reviews in total.