ReviewCureus2022
Need, Strategies and Requirements in the Medical System for Bone Banks: A Review Article.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hydroxyapatite/poly-L-lactide mesh tube versus β-tricalcium phosphate granules in locking plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures: a retrospective comparative study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Global research trends in allogenic bone and bone banking in orthopaedics: a 25-year bibliometric analysis (2000-2025).Cell and tissue banking · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Stem Cell Therapy for Orthopedic Conditions, Including Osteoarthritis and Bone Defects.Cureus · 2024Article
- Allograft bone banking experience in Nigeria: a review of first 2 years.The Pan African medical journal · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An orthopedic bone bank's creation and management is a challenging procedure where medical organization and legal requirements interact. There are no formal regulations for the management and organization of an orthopedic bone bank in the Netherlands or any other nation in Europe. The recently revised "law of security and quality for utilizing human materials in the Netherlands establishes guidelines for the technical and administrative elements of using human tissue and cells. The bone bank's processes involve a rigorous questionnaire for choosing donors, a complete bacteriological, histological, and serological examination, as well as industry-standard, practices for registering, processing, preserving, distributing, and storing bone allografts. This article explains how an approved bone bank is run, and it may be used as a suggestion for formal regulation or as a model for additional orthopedic bone banks in Europe. Osseous graft manufacture, testing, packing, storage, and transportation are all handled by bone banks. Their primary responsibility is to guarantee the transplants' biological characteristics and microbial cleanliness by legal and quality criteria. All orthopedic surgeons face the challenge of reconstructing bone defects; to address this issue, there are several methods, including the use of autografts, allografts, and bone substitutes to enhance and speed bone recovery. Although autografts have superior biological qualities, their volume is constrained and they are linked to donor site morbidity. Allografts are readily accessible, however, there are still worries about the possibility of infections, and they lack osteosarcoma qualities.
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.