Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35890557›Full record

ReviewPolymers2022

Titanium or Biodegradable Osteosynthesis in Maxillofacial Surgery? In Vitro and In Vivo Performances.

Barzi Gareb, Nico B Van Bakelen, Arjan Vissink, Ruud R M Bos, Baucke Van Minnen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barzi GarebDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3534-9176
Nico B Van BakelenDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
Arjan VissinkDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2581-4361
Ruud R M BosDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
Baucke Van MinnenDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5642-8194
University Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteosynthesis systems are used to fixate bone segments in maxillofacial surgery. Titanium osteosynthesis systems are currently the gold standard. However, the disadvantages result in symptomatic removal in up to 40% of cases. Biodegradable osteosynthesis systems, composed of degradable polymers, could reduce the need for removal of osteosynthesis systems while avoiding the aforementioned disadvantages of titanium osteosyntheses. However, disadvantages of biodegradable systems include decreased mechanical properties and possible foreign body reactions. In this review, the literature that focused on the in vitro and in vivo performances of biodegradable and titanium osteosyntheses is discussed. The focus was on factors underlying the favorable clinical outcome of osteosyntheses, including the degradation characteristics of biodegradable osteosyntheses and the host response they elicit. Furthermore, recommendations for clinical usage and future research are given. Based on the available (clinical) evidence, biodegradable copolymeric osteosyntheses are a viable alternative to titanium osteosyntheses when applied to treat maxillofacial trauma, with similar efficacy and significantly lower symptomatic osteosynthesis removal. For orthognathic surgery, biodegradable copolymeric osteosyntheses are a valid alternative to titanium osteosyntheses, but a longer operation time is needed. An osteosynthesis system composed of an amorphous copolymer, preferably using ultrasound welding with well-contoured shapes and sufficient mechanical properties, has the greatest potential as a biocompatible biodegradable copolymeric osteosynthesis system. Future research should focus on surface modifications (e.g., nanogel coatings) and novel biodegradable materials (e.g., magnesium alloys and silk) to address the disadvantages of current osteosynthesis systems.

Indexed as

absorbable implantsbiocompatible materialsfracture fixationorthopedic fixation devicespolymersreconstructive surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID35890557
PMCPMC9316877
OpenAlexW4284670453

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.