Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33553332›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Surface-treated 3D printed Ti-6Al-4V scaffolds with enhanced bone regeneration performance: an

Guangdao Zhang, Pengyu Zhao, Lin Lin, Limei Qin, Zhiguang Huan, Sander Leeflang, Amir A Zadpoor, Jie Zhou, Lin Wu

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Bioprinting Technologies and Bioinks for Vascular Model Establishment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Guangdao ZhangDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Pengyu ZhaoState Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Lin LinThe First People's Hospital of Shenyang, Shenyang, China.
Limei QinDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Zhiguang HuanState Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Sander LeeflangDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Amir A ZadpoorDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Jie ZhouDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Lin WuDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
China Medical University · CNDelft University of Technology · NLShanghai Institute of Ceramics · CNShenyang First People's Hospital · CNUniversity of Chinese Academy of Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven their highly adjustable and predictable properties, three-dimensional(3D) printed geometrically ordered porous biomaterials offer unique opportunities as orthopedic implants. The performance of such biomaterials is, however, as much a result of the surface properties of the struts as it is of the 3D porous structure. In our previous study, we have investigated the

methods3D printed Ti-6Al-4V scaffolds with BG and MBG surface modifications were implanted into the femoral condyle of the rabbits, the Ti-6Al-4V scaffolds without surface modification were used as the control. At week 3, 6, and 9 after the implantation, micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) imaging, fluorescence double-labeling to determine the mineral apposition rate (MAR), and histological analysis of non-decalcified sections were performed.

resultsWe found significantly higher volumes of regenerated bone, significantly higher values of the relevant bone morphometric parameters, clear signs of bone matrix apposition and maturation, and the evidence of progressed angiogenesis and blood vessel formation in the groups where the bioactive glass was added as a coating, particularly the MGB group.

conclusionsThe MBG coating resulted in enhanced osteoconduction and vascularization in bone defect healing, which was attributed to the release of silicon and calcium ions and the presence of a nano-mesoporous structure on the surface of the MBG specimens.

Indexed as

3D printingbioactive glassBone regenerationin vivomesoporous bioactive glass

Identifiers

PMID33553332
PMCPMC7859759
OpenAlexW3111783570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.