Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37137563›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Protocol for the BONE-RECON trial: a single-arm feasibility trial for critical sized lower limb BONE defect RECONstruction using the mPCL-TCP scaffold system with autologous vascularised corticoperiosteal tissue transfer.

David S Sparks, Jay Wiper, Thomas Lloyd, Marie-Luise Wille, Marjoree Sehu, Flavia M Savi, Nicola Ward, Dietmar W Hutmacher, Michael Wagels

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David S SparksQueensland University of Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6495-3770
Jay WiperDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Thomas LloydDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Marie-Luise WilleQueensland University of Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Marjoree SehuDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Flavia M SaviQueensland University of Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Nicola WardDepartment of Orthopaedics, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Dietmar W HutmacherARC Training Centre for Multiscale 3D Imaging, Modelling and Manufacturing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia michael.wagels@health.qld.gov.au dietmar.hutmacher@qut.edu.au.
Michael WagelsDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia michael.wagels@health.qld.gov.au dietmar.hutmacher@qut.edu.au.
Princess Alexandra Hospital · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUTranslational Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionReconstruction of critical bone defects is challenging. In a substantial subgroup of patients, conventional reconstructive techniques are insufficient. Biodegradable scaffolds have emerged as a novel tissue engineering strategy for critical-sized bone defect reconstruction. A corticoperiosteal flap integrates the hosts' ability to regenerate bone and permits the creation of a vascular axis for scaffold neo-vascularisation (regenerative matching axial vascularisation-RMAV). This phase IIa study evaluates the application of the RMAV approach alongside a custom medical-grade polycaprolactone-tricalcium phosphate (mPCL-TCP) scaffold (Osteopore) to regenerate bone sufficient to heal critical size defects in lower limb defects. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This open-label, single-arm feasibility trial will be jointly coordinated by the Complex Lower Limb Clinic (CLLC) at the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Woolloongabba (Queensland, Australia), the Australian Centre for Complex Integrated Surgical Solutions (Queensland, Australia) and the Faculty of Engineering, Queensland University of Technology in Kelvin Grove (Queensland, Australia). Aiming for limb salvage, the study population (n=10) includes any patient referred to the CLLC with a critical-sized bone defect not amenable to conventional reconstructive approaches, after discussion by the interdisciplinary team. All patients will receive treatment using the RMAV approach using a custom mPCL-TCP implant. The primary study endpoint will be safety and tolerability of the reconstruction. Secondary end points include time to bone union and weight-bearing status on the treated limb. Results of this trial will help shape the role of scaffold-guided bone regenerative approaches in complex lower limb reconstruction where current options remain limited. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the participating centre. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001007921.

Indexed as

Bone and BonesTissue ScaffoldsAustraliaClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicFeasibility StudiesHumansLower ExtremityLimb reconstructionOrthopaedic & trauma surgeryPlastic & reconstructive surgery

Identifiers

PMID37137563
PMCPMC10163528
OpenAlexW4368362019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.