ArticleJournal of orthopaedic translation2022
An injectable pH neutral bioactive glass-based bone cement with suitable bone regeneration ability.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- SA/HA double-network hydrogel combined with PVDF electret membrane enhances osteogenic differentiation of DPSCs and promotes mandibular bone defect repair.Regenerative therapy · 2026Article
- An immunomodulatory bioactive glass orchestrates early bone healing via coordinated macrophage polarization and osteogenesis-osteolysis balance.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Novel Biologically Active Glass Fiber Functionalized Using Magnesium Phosphate Cement Promotes Bone and Vascular Regeneration.Advanced biology · 2025Article
- Biomaterial-based strategies for bone cement: modulating the bone microenvironment and promoting regeneration.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Review
- Orthopaedic therapeutic advancement driven by innovations in biomaterial research and stem cell biology.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As a class of promising bone augmentation materials, bone cements have attracted particular attention. Due to various limitations, the current bone cements are still imperfect. In this study, an injectable pH neutral bioactive bone cement (PSC/CSC) was developed by mixing phosphosilicate bioactive glass (PSC) and α-calcium sulfate hemihydrate (CSH), with the goal of optimizing bone defects repairs. Methods: A range of compositions (PSC/CSC: 10P/90C, 30P/70C, 50P/50C) were developed and their physicochemical properties evaluated. Their bone regeneration ability was compared to those of two widely used bone cements as controls (calcium phosphate cement (CPC) and Genex®) in rabbit femoral condyle bone defect models for 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Based on physicochemical properties and Results: Based on physicochemical properties, the 30P/70C formula exhibited suitable operability and compressive strength (3.5 ± 0.3 MPa), which fulfilled the requirements for cancellous bone substitutes. Conclusion: The new composite cement, 30P/70C, is a favorable bioactive glass-based bone cement with suitable operability, compressive strength and bone regeneration ability. The translational potential of this article: Clinically, treatment of large bone defects is still a major challenge for orthopaedic trauma. We showed that 30P/70C has the potential to be clinically used as an injectable cement for rapid bone repairs and reconstruction of critical sized bone defects.
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.