Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35629649›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

A Review on Biomaterials for Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology: From Past to Present.

Grzegorz Szczęsny, Mateusz Kopec, Denis J Politis, Zbigniew L Kowalewski, Adam Łazarski, Tomasz Szolc

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 2050: An Arthroplasty Odyssey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Grzegorz SzczęsnyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Medical University, 4 Lindleya Str., 02-005 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7710-4164
Mateusz KopecInstitute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 5B Pawińskiego Str., 02-106 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9565-3407
Denis J PolitisDepartment of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Cyprus, Nicosia 20537, Cyprus.
Zbigniew L KowalewskiInstitute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 5B Pawińskiego Str., 02-106 Warsaw, Poland.
Adam ŁazarskiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Medical University, 4 Lindleya Str., 02-005 Warsaw, Poland.
Tomasz SzolcInstitute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 5B Pawińskiego Str., 02-106 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2383-5073

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The principal features essential for the success of an orthopaedic implant are its shape, dimensional accuracy, and adequate mechanical properties. Unlike other manufactured products, chemical stability and toxicity are of increased importance due to the need for biocompatibility over an implants life which could span several years. Thus, the combination of mechanical and biological properties determines the clinical usefulness of biomaterials in orthopaedic and musculoskeletal trauma surgery. Materials commonly used for these applications include stainless steel, cobalt-chromium and titanium alloys, ceramics, polyethylene, and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) bone cement. This study reviews the properties of commonly used materials and the advantages and disadvantages of each, with special emphasis on the sensitivity, toxicity, irritancy, and possible mutagenic and teratogenic capabilities. In addition, the production and final finishing processes of implants are discussed. Finally, potential directions for future implant development are discussed, with an emphasis on developing advanced personalised implants, according to a patient's stature and physical requirements.

Indexed as

alloysbiocompatible materialsbiomaterialsceramicimplantsorthopaedic surgical procedurespolyethylene

Identifiers

PMID35629649
PMCPMC9145924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.