PURPOSE: Clefts of the lip and palate are the most prevalent congenital craniofacial birth defect in humans. The developing field of tissue engineering is considered for the management of clefts of the lip and palate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out by using electronic databases (such as PubMed and ISI Web of Science) to search topics including "cleft palate," "tissue engineering," "bone engineering," "palate engineering," and "alveolar bone grafting." To reflect current practice and research, these searches were limited primarily to articles published after the year 2000. RESULTS: Current approaches for the treatment of clefts of the lip and palate include surgery and bone grafts; however, there are limitations associated with these therapies. Tissue engineering strategies, particularly alveolar bone engineering and soft tissue engineering, may provide clinicians with new alternatives. The application of these emerging technologies to a pediatric population must be well considered. CONCLUSIONS: A tissue engineering approach may be a useful alternative for the treatment of cleft palates as it mitigates the concerns of donor site morbidity as well as provides additional options including scaffold implantation and growth factor delivery.
PURPOSE:Clefts of the lip and palate are the most prevalent congenital craniofacial birth defect in humans. The developing field of tissue engineering is considered for the management of clefts of the lip and palate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out by using electronic databases (such as PubMed and ISI Web of Science) to search topics including "cleft palate," "tissue engineering," "bone engineering," "palate engineering," and "alveolar bone grafting." To reflect current practice and research, these searches were limited primarily to articles published after the year 2000. RESULTS: Current approaches for the treatment of clefts of the lip and palate include surgery and bone grafts; however, there are limitations associated with these therapies. Tissue engineering strategies, particularly alveolar bone engineering and soft tissue engineering, may provide clinicians with new alternatives. The application of these emerging technologies to a pediatric population must be well considered. CONCLUSIONS: A tissue engineering approach may be a useful alternative for the treatment of cleft palates as it mitigates the concerns of donor site morbidity as well as provides additional options including scaffold implantation and growth factor delivery.
Authors: Shashwat Bhakta; Deepak K Pattanayak; Hiroaki Takadama; Tadashi Kokubo; Cheryl A Miller; Mehdi Mirsaneh; Ian M Reaney; Ian Brook; Richard van Noort; Paul V Hatton Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: M A Martín-Piedra; M Alaminos; R Fernández-Valadés-Gámez; A España-López; E Liceras-Liceras; I Sánchez-Montesinos; A Martínez-Plaza; M C Sánchez-Quevedo; R Fernández-Valadés; I Garzón Journal: Histochem Cell Biol Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 4.304
Authors: Chen Shen; Maxime M Wang; Lukasz Witek; Nick Tovar; Bruce N Cronstein; Andrea Torroni; Roberto L Flores; Paulo G Coelho Journal: Ann Plast Surg Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 1.763
Authors: Wouter M M T van Hout; Aebele B Mink van der Molen; Corstiaan C Breugem; Ronald Koole; Ellen M Van Cann Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Isaac A Rodriguez; Parthasarathy A Madurantakam; Jennifer M McCool; Scott A Sell; Hu Yang; Peter C Moon; Gary L Bowlin Journal: Int J Biomater Date: 2012-08-16
Authors: Jeremie D Oliver; Shihai Jia; Leslie R Halpern; Emily M Graham; Emma C Turner; John S Colombo; David W Grainger; Rena N D'Souza Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 7.376