ArticleTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2023
Bioactive Bone Substitute in a Rabbit Ulna Model: Preclinical Study.
Article in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional-Printed Poly-L-Lactic Acid/Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP)/Collagen Bone Substitute and Commercial Hydroxyapatite/BMP for Bone Regeneration Efficacy Using a Mouse Calvarial Model.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2025Article
- From "immune silence" to "immune dialogue": modification strategies for bone substitutes based on bone immunomodulatory characteristics.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- 3D Bioprinting in Limb Salvage Surgery.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent therapies to effectively treat long-bone defects and extensive bone tissue loss remains limited. In this study, we created a new bone substitute by integrating advanced technologies such as structure patterning, controlled release of a bone growth factor and conjugation system for clinically effective bone regeneration. This novel bioactive bone substitute was evaluated for its safety and efficacy using a rabbit ulna model.
methodsA three dimensional bone patterned cylindrical structure with 1.5 cm in length and 5 mm in diameter was printed using poly(L-lactic acid)(PLLA) as a weight-bearing support and space-filling scaffold. And a bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2) was employed to enhance bone regeneration, and coated to a 3D PLLA using alginate catechol and collagen to prolong the release kinetics. This novel bone substitute (BS)was evaluated for its physico-chemical and biological properties in vitro, and histological analysis and radiographical analysis such as X-ray, CT and micro-CT image analysis were performed to evaluate new bone formation in vivo.
resultsThe BS possesses an ideal shape and mechanically suitable proeperties for clinical use, with an easy-to-grab and break-resistant design at both ends, 80 ± 10 MPa of compression strength, and BMP2 release for two months. Histological analysis demonstrated the biocompability of BS with minimal inflammation and immune response, and X-ray, CT and micro-CT demonstrated effective new bone formation in rabbit ulna defect model.
conclusionThe preclinical study of a novel bioactive bone substitute has shown its safe and effective properties in an animal model suggesting its clinical potential.
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.