ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2023
Translation of nanotechnology-based implants for orthopedic applications: current barriers and future perspective.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- 4D nanoimaging-guided smart therapeutics: spatiotemporal control of disease microenvironments.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Reimagining Spinal Surgery at the Nanoscale: Smart Implants, Targeted Therapies, and Translational Challenges.Biology · 2026Review
- Hydroxyapatite-cellulose composites: properties, fabrication methods, and applications.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Long-term Performance and Durability of Biomaterials and Implant Designs in Total Joint Arthroplasty and Spinal Fusion.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2026Article
- Emerging Implantable Sensor Technologies at the Intersection of Engineering and Brain Science.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Topography-based implants for bone regeneration: Design, biological mechanism, and therapeutics.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Innovative Nanotechnological Approaches in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Comparison In Vitro Study on the Interface between Skin and Bone Cell Cultures and Microporous Titanium Samples Manufactured with 3D Printing Technology Versus Sintered Samples.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Emerging Technologies in Hand Orthopedic Surgery: Current Trends and Future Directions.Galen medical journal · 2024Article
- Pioneering nanomedicine in orthopedic treatment care: a review of current research and practices.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Nanotechnology development in surgical applications: recent trends and developments.European journal of medical research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of bioimplant engineering is to develop biologically compatible materials for restoring, preserving, or altering damaged tissues and/or organ functions. The variety of substances used for orthopedic implant applications has been substantially influenced by modern material technology. Therefore, nanomaterials can mimic the surface properties of normal tissues, including surface chemistry, topography, energy, and wettability. Moreover, the new characteristics of nanomaterials promote their application in sustaining the progression of many tissues. The current review establishes a basis for nanotechnology-driven biomaterials by demonstrating the fundamental design problems that influence the success or failure of an orthopedic graft, cell adhesion, proliferation, antimicrobial/antibacterial activity, and differentiation. In this context, extensive research has been conducted on the nano-functionalization of biomaterial surfaces to enhance cell adhesion, differentiation, propagation, and implant population with potent antimicrobial activity. The possible nanomaterials applications (in terms of a functional nanocoating or a nanostructured surface) may resolve a variety of issues (such as bacterial adhesion and corrosion) associated with conventional metallic or non-metallic grafts, primarily for optimizing implant procedures. Future developments in orthopedic biomaterials, such as smart biomaterials, porous structures, and 3D implants, show promise for achieving the necessary characteristics and shape of a stimuli-responsive implant. Ultimately, the major barriers to the commercialization of nanotechnology-derived biomaterials are addressed to help overcome the limitations of current orthopedic biomaterials in terms of critical fundamental factors including cost of therapy, quality, pain relief, and implant life. Despite the recent success of nanotechnology, there are significant hurdles that must be overcome before nanomedicine may be applied to orthopedics. The objective of this review was to provide a thorough examination of recent advancements, their commercialization prospects, as well as the challenges and potential perspectives associated with them. This review aims to assist healthcare providers and researchers in extracting relevant data to develop translational research within the field. In addition, it will assist the readers in comprehending the scope and gaps of nanomedicine's applicability in the orthopedics field.
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.