ArticleFrontiers in physiology2018
Osteoconductive Microarchitecture of Bone Substitutes for Bone Regeneration Revisited.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.
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
50 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling and simulation of a porous mobility total ankle arthroplasty implant: enhancing bone-in growth and reducing micromotion for improved fixation.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Additive Manufacturing of Bead-Chain-Shaped Scaffolds with AI-Based Process Optimization.Polymers · 2025Article
- [Expert consensus on clinical randomized controlled trial design and evaluation methods for bone grafting or substitute materials in alveolar bone defects].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2025Article
- Porous Structures, Surface Modifications, and Smart Technologies for Total Ankle Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Composite Polylactide/Polycaprolactone Foams with Hierarchical Porous Structure for Pre-Vascularized Tissue Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- Bone grafts and synthetic substitutes in dental applications: a comprehensive review of molecular mechanisms, materials evolution, and clinical perspective.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Three-Dimensionally Printed Bionic Hydroxyapatite (HAp) Ceramic Scaffolds with Different Structures and Porosities: Strength, Biocompatibility, and Biomedical Application Potential.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Personalized bioceramic grafts for craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration.International journal of oral science · 2024Review
- Tomographic and Electron Microscopy Description of Two Bone-Substitute Xenografts for the Preservation of Dental Alveoli.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Functional Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Regeneration: A Comprehensive Review of Materials, Methods, and Future Directions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Review
- Optimizing Filament-Based TCP Scaffold Design for Osteoconduction and Bone Augmentation: Insights from In Vivo Rabbit Models.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- TPMS Microarchitectures for Vertical Bone Augmentation and Osteoconduction: An In Vivo Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Patient-specific beta-tricalcium phosphate scaffold for customized alveolar ridge augmentation: a case report : Case Report: patient-specific β-TCP scaffold for alveolar ridge CBR.International journal of implant dentistry · 2024Article
- Functionalization of Ceramic Scaffolds with Exosomes from Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Bone Tissue Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Biomaterial scaffolds in maxillofacial bone tissue engineering: A review of recent advances.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- Enhanced bone regeneration in rat calvarial defects through BMP2 release from engineered poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Experimental Verification of the Impact of the Contact Area between the Defect Site and the Scaffold on Bone Regeneration Efficacy.Polymers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last three decades, all efforts in bone tissue engineering were driven by the dogma that the ideal pore size in bone substitutes lies between 0.3 and 0.5 mm in diameter. Newly developed additive manufacturing methodologies for ceramics facilitate the total control over pore size, pore distribution, bottleneck size, and bottleneck distribution. Therefore, this appears to be the method of choice with which to test the aforementioned characteristics of an ideal bone substitute. To this end, we produced a library of 15 scaffolds with diverse defined pore/bottleneck dimensions and distributions, tested them
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.