ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2023
The Concept of Scaffold-Guided Bone Regeneration for the Treatment of Long Bone Defects: Current Clinical Application and Future Perspective.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 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
59 citing papers in PubMed, 109 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- The road to the Pearl-String Technique: lessons learned from early IMT modifications using RIA autograft and cancellous allograft granules.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Tissue Engineering for Massive Bone Defects: The Volumetric Scaling Problem and Strategies to Solve It.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Synchronizing degradation with regeneration: a model-driven framework for designing biodegradable biomaterials in bone tissue engineering.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- From Nature to Innovation: Exploring Natural Biopolymers in 3D Bioprinting for Bone Regeneration.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Review
- Innovative prospects in 3D printed bio-scaffolds for osteochondral tissue engineering: A systematic review.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- Patient-Specific Lattice Implants for Segmental Femoral and Tibial Reconstruction (Part 1): Defect Patterns, Fixation Strategies and Reconstruction Options-A Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Next-generation craniomaxillofacial implants for reconstructive surgery: balancing biomechanics, biocompatibility, and bioactivity.International journal of oral science · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- Forearm Nonunion and Segmental Bone Defects: A Focused Review of Masquelet Reconstruction and Free Vascularized Bone Grafting.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2026Review
- Advancements in Role of 3D-Printed Implants for Complex Reconstructions in Polytrauma Cases: A Clinical Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Advances in Titanium-Based Biomaterial for Human Bone Scaffolds: Narrative Review on Design, Fabrication, Surface Engineering, Implantation, and Biological Evaluation.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Mechanobiologically-optimized non-resorbable artificial bone for patient-matched scaffold-guided bone regeneration.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Investigation of the biodegradation kinetics and associated mechanical properties of 3D-printed polycaprolactone during long-term preclinical testing.Biomaterials · 2025Article
- Types of Bone Substitutes and Their Application in Regenerative Medicine: A Systematic Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Intraoperative Biologization of β-TCP and PCL-TCP by Autologous Proteins.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Bioinspired 3D Bone Model: Mimicking the Cortical-Spongy Bone Architecture and Biology for Enhanced Physiological Representation of Bone.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Article
- The role of electrical stimulation in bone regeneration: mechanistic insights and therapeutic advances.Bioelectronic medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The treatment of bone defects remains a challenging clinical problem with high reintervention rates, morbidity, and resulting significant healthcare costs. Surgical techniques are constantly evolving, but outcomes can be influenced by several parameters, including the patient's age, comorbidities, systemic disorders, the anatomical location of the defect, and the surgeon's preference and experience. The most used therapeutic modalities for the regeneration of long bone defects include distraction osteogenesis (bone transport), free vascularized fibular grafts, the Masquelet technique, allograft, and (arthroplasty with) mega-prostheses. Over the past 25 years, three-dimensional (3D) printing, a breakthrough layer-by-layer manufacturing technology that produces final parts directly from 3D model data, has taken off and transformed the treatment of bone defects by enabling personalized therapies with highly porous 3D-printed implants tailored to the patient. Therefore, to reduce the morbidities and complications associated with current treatment regimens, efforts have been made in translational research toward 3D-printed scaffolds to facilitate bone regeneration. Three-dimensional printed scaffolds should not only provide osteoconductive surfaces for cell attachment and subsequent bone formation but also provide physical support and containment of bone graft material during the regeneration process, enhancing bone ingrowth, while simultaneously, orthopaedic implants supply mechanical strength with rigid, stable external and/or internal fixation. In this perspective review, we focus on elaborating on the history of bone defect treatment methods and assessing current treatment approaches as well as recent developments, including existing evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of 3D-printed scaffolds for bone defect regeneration. Furthermore, it is evident that the regulatory framework and organization and financing of evidence-based clinical trials remains very complex, and new challenges for non-biodegradable and biodegradable 3D-printed scaffolds for bone regeneration are emerging that have not yet been sufficiently addressed, such as guideline development for specific surgical indications, clinically feasible design concepts for needed multicentre international preclinical and clinical trials, the current medico-legal status, and reimbursement. These challenges underscore the need for intensive exchange and open and honest debate among leaders in the field. This goal can be addressed in a well-planned and focused stakeholder workshop on the topic of patient-specific 3D-printed scaffolds for long bone defect regeneration, as proposed in this perspective review.
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.