ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2023
Customized bioceramic scaffolds and metal meshes for challenging large-size mandibular bone defect regeneration and repair.
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biofabrication for complex tissue regeneration: a scoping review of translational gaps in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Advanced materials and devices strategies of mechanical stimulation for tissue regeneration.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Review
- Graphene oxide-modified PEEK composites: Properties and applications in orthopaedic repair - A review.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- The 3D printed biphasic scaffolds incorporating epimedin C promotes osteochondral regeneration in osteoarthritis rats.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Simplified chemical deposition of CuJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Article
- Strategic advances in Vat Photopolymerization for 3D printing of calcium phosphate-based bone scaffolds: A review.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Surface modification of polyetheretherketone for boosted osseointegration: A review.Biomaterials translational · 2025Review
- Tuning zinc content in wollastonite bioceramic endowing outstanding angiogenic and antibacterial functions beneficial for orbital reconstruction.Bioactive materials · 2024Article
- Enhancing osteogenesis and angiogenesis functions for Ti-24Nb-4Zr-8Sn scaffolds with methacrylated gelatin and deferoxamine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Influence of Ag and/or Sr Dopants on the Mechanical Properties and In Vitro Degradation of β-Tricalcium Phosphate-Based Ceramics.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large-size mandible graft has huge needs in clinic caused by infection, tumor, congenital deformity, bone trauma and so on. However, the reconstruction of large-size mandible defect is challenged due to its complex anatomical structure and large-range bone injury. The design and fabrication of porous implants with large segments and specific shapes matching the native mandible remain a considerable challenge. Herein, the 6% Mg-doped calcium silicate (CSi-Mg6) and β- and α-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP, α-TCP) bioceramics were fabricated by digital light processing as the porous scaffolds of over 50% in porosity, while the titanium mesh was fabricated by selective laser melting. The mechanical tests showed that the initial flexible/compressive resistance of CSi-Mg6 scaffolds was markedly higher than that of β-TCP and α-TCP scaffolds. Cell experiments showed that these materials all had good biocompatibility, while CSi-Mg6 significantly promoted cell proliferation. In the rabbit critically sized mandible bone defects (∼13 mm in length) filled with porous bioceramic scaffolds, the titanium meshes and titanium nails were acted as fixation and load bearing. The results showed that the defects were kept during the observation period in the blank (control) group; in contrast, the osteogenic capability was significantly enhanced in the CSi-Mg6 and α-TCP groups in comparison with the β-TCP group, and these two groups not only had significantly increased new bone formation but also had thicker trabecular and smaller trabecular spacing. Besides, the CSi-Mg6 and α-TCP groups showed appreciable material biodegradation in the later stage (from 8 to 12 weeks) in comparison with the β-TCP scaffolds while the CSi-Mg6 group showed much outstanding mechanical capacity
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.