ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2021
Bone Regeneration in Load-Bearing Segmental Defects, Guided by Biomorphic, Hierarchically Structured Apatitic Scaffold.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Ceramic Cages an Option for Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Comparative Biomechanical Numerical Study.JOR spine · 2026Article
- A pre-market, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate b.Bone for posterolateral fusion treatment of degenerative thoracolumbar, lumbar or lumbosacral spinal disease (b.Spine clinical trial).Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Plant-Derived Bone Substitute Presents Effective Osteointegration in Several Clinical Settings: A Pilot Study from a Single Center.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Distal femoral bone defect treatment using an engineered hydroxyapatite cylinder scaffold made from rattan wood.BMJ case reports · 2025Article
- Antibiotics release by hybrid bone scaffold: relationship between kinetic profiles and scaffold intrinsic features.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional-printed strontium-incorporated β-TCP bioceramic triply periodic minimal surface scaffolds with enhanced angiogenic and osteogenic properties.Regenerative biomaterials · 2025Article
- Extracellular Matrix-Surrogate Advanced Functional Composite Biomaterials for Tissue Repair and Regeneration.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Review
- Silver phosphate-modified carbonate apatite honeycomb scaffolds for anti-infective and pigmentation-free bone tissue engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2024Article
- Enhanced bone regeneration in rat calvarial defects through BMP2 release from engineered poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Preliminary osteogenic and antibacterial investigations of wood derived antibiotic-loaded bone substitute for the treatment of infected bone defects.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Mechanics Predicts Effective Critical-Size Bone Regeneration Using 3D-Printed Bioceramic Scaffolds.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in Bioengineering Bone Revascularization Based on Composite Materials Comprising Hydroxyapatite.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Bone defect filling with a novel rattan-wood based not-sintered hydroxyapatite and beta-tricalcium phosphate material (b.Bone™) after tricortical bone graft harvesting - A consecutive clinical case series of 9 patients.Trauma case reports · 2023Article
- Long-Bone-Regeneration Process in a Sheep Animal Model, Using Hydroxyapatite Ceramics Prepared by Tape-Casting Method.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Scaffold Guided Bone Regeneration for the Treatment of Large Segmental Defects in Long Bones.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Article
- Nanomechanical Mapping of Hard Tissues by Atomic Force Microscopy: An Application to Cortical Bone.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Calcium Phosphate-Based Biomaterials for Bone Repair.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Review
- Chest-Wall Tumors and Surgical Techniques: State-of-the-Art and Our Institutional Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Design Strategies and Biomimetic Approaches for Calcium Phosphate Scaffolds in Bone Tissue Regeneration.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The regeneration of load-bearing segmental bone defects remains a significant clinical problem in orthopedics, mainly due to the lack of scaffolds with composition and 3D porous structure effective in guiding and sustaining new bone formation and vascularization in large bone defects. In the present study, biomorphic calcium phosphate bone scaffolds (GreenBone™) featuring osteon-mimicking, hierarchically organized, 3D porous structure and lamellar nano-architecture were implanted in a critical cortical defect in sheep and compared with allograft. Two different types of scaffolds were tested: one made of ion-doped hydroxyapatite/β-tricalcium-phosphate (GB-1) and other made of undoped hydroxyapatite only (GB-2). X-ray diffraction patterns of GB-1 and GB-2 confirmed that both scaffolds were made of hydroxyapatite, with a minor amount of β-TCP in GB-1. The chemical composition analysis, obtained by ICP-OES spectrometer, highlighted the carbonation extent and the presence of small amounts of Mg and Sr as doping ions in GB-1. SEM micrographs showed the channel-like wide open porosity of the biomorphic scaffolds and the typical architecture of internal channel walls, characterized by a cell structure mimicking the natural parenchyma of the rattan wood used as a template for the scaffold fabrication. Both GB-1 and GB-2 scaffolds show very similar porosity extent and 3D organization, as also revealed by mercury intrusion porosimetry. Comparing the two scaffolds, GB-1 showed slightly higher fracture strength, as well as improved stability at the stress plateau. In comparison to allograft, at the follow-up time of 6 months, both GB-1 and GB-2 scaffolds showed higher new bone formation and quality of regenerated bone (trabecular thickness, number, and separation). In addition, higher osteoid surface (OS/BS), osteoid thickness (OS.Th), osteoblast surface (Ob.S/BS), vessels/microvessels numbers, as well as substantial osteoclast-mediated implant resorption were observed. The highest values in OS.Th and Ob. S/BS parameters were found in GB-1 scaffold. Finally, Bone Mineralization Index of new bone within scaffolds, as determined by micro-indentation, showed a significantly higher microhardness for GB-1 scaffold in comparison to GB-2. These findings suggested that the biomorphic calcium phosphate scaffolds were able to promote regeneration of load-bearing segmental bone defects in a clinically relevant scenario, which still represents one of the greatest challenges in orthopedics nowadays.
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.