SynthesisThe Journal of craniofacial surgery2026
Are Buccal Fat Pad-Derived Stem Cells Effective in Adults for Maxillary Bone Regeneration? A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The Journal of craniofacial surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Critical-size bone defects in the maxillofacial region remain a major challenge. Although autografts are widely used, they are limited by donor-site morbidity and graft availability. Tissue engineering with mesenchymal stem cells, particularly buccal fat pad-derived stem cells (BFPSCs), offers a promising alternative due to their accessibility and osteogenic potential. This systematic review assesses clinical evidence on the use of BFPSCs for regenerating oro-maxillofacial bone defects in adults. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies from January 2015 to September 2025. Inclusion criteria were in vivo human studies using BFPSCs for maxillofacial bone regeneration. Excluded were in vitro, animal studies, cell-free BFP applications, and non-original articles. Two reviewers independently screened studies; discrepancies were resolved by a senior reviewer. The level of evidence was assessed using Oxford CEBM criteria. Out of 375 identified articles, 6 clinical studies (including one randomized trial) involving 49 patients met inclusion criteria. BFPSCs were applied alone or with autologous bone. All studies reported favorable clinical and radiologic outcomes; some included histologic data confirming new bone formation. BFPSCs demonstrate promising potential for maxillofacial bone regeneration. However, high-quality studies are needed to confirm effectiveness and define standardized protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.