Full-Thickness Oral Mucoperiosteal Defects: Challenges and Opportunities

Regenerative engineering strategies for the oral mucoperiosteum, as may be needed following surgeries, such as cleft palate repair and tumor resection, are underdeveloped compared with those for maxillofacial bone. However, critical-size tissue defects left to heal by secondary intention can lead to complications, such as infection, fistula formation, scarring, and midface hypoplasia. This review describes current clinical practice for replacing mucoperiosteal tissue, including autografts and allografts. Potentially paradigm-shifting experimental regenerative engineering strategies for mucoperiosteal wound healing, such as hybrid grafts and engineered matrices, are also discussed. Throughout the review, the advantages and disadvantages of each replacement or regeneration strategy are outlined in the context of clinical outcomes, quality of life for the patient, availability of materials, and cost of care. Finally, future directions for research and development in the area of mucoperiosteum repair are proposed, with an emphasis on identifying globally available and affordable solutions for promoting mucoperiosteal regeneration. Impact statement Unassisted oral mucoperiosteal wound healing can lead to severe complications such as infection, fistulae, scarring, and developmental abnormalities. Thus, strategies for promoting wound healing must be considered when mucoperiosteal defects are incident to oral surgery, as in palatoplasty or tumor resection. Emerging mucoperiosteal tissue engineering strategies, described in this study, have the potential to overcome the limitations of current standard-of-care donor tissue grafts. For example, the use of engineered mucoperiosteal biomaterials could circumvent concerns about tissue availability and immunogenicity. Moreover, employment of tissue engineering strategies may improve the equity of oral wound care by increasing global affordability and accessibility of materials.