ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Impact of Defect Size on Bone Healing in Critical-Size Bone Defects Investigated on a Rat Femur Defect Model Comparing Two Treatment Methods.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hybrid SES-MEW Scaffold Strategies: A Narrative Review of Multi-Scale Fiber Architectures for Soft and Hard Tissue Engineering.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- 3D-printing on human acellular dermis for chest wall reconstructions-anJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Can alternatives to animal testing yield useful information regarding biological mechanisms and drug discovery?Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Review
- The Interplay of Angiogenesis and Osteogenesis in Non-Stabilized Incomplete Tibial Fractures: A Temporal Study in Rats.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025Article
- Comparison of two plates and screw osteosynthesis configurations in a rat model of critical sized femoral defects to reduce implant related failures.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Critical-size bone defects up to 25 cm can be treated successfully using the induced membrane technique established by Masquelet. To shorten this procedure, human acellular dermis (HAD) has had success in replacing this membrane in rat models. The aim of this study was to compare bone healing for smaller and larger defects using an induced membrane and HAD in a rat model. Using our established femoral defect model in rats, the animals were placed into four groups and defects of 5 mm or 10 mm size were set, either filling them with autologous spongiosa and surrounding the defect with HAD or waiting for the induced membrane to form around a cement spacer and filling this cavity in a second operation with a cancellous bone graft. Healing was assessed eight weeks after the operation using µ-CT, histological staining, and an assessment of the progress of bone formation using an established bone healing score. The α-smooth muscle actin used as a signal of blood vessel formation was stained and counted. The 5 mm defects showed significantly better bone union and a higher bone healing score than the 10 mm defects. HAD being used for the smaller defects resulted in a significantly higher bone healing score even than for the induced membrane and significantly higher blood vessel formation, corroborating the good results achieved by using HAD in previous studies. In comparison, same-sized groups showed significant differences in bone healing as well as blood vessel formation, suggesting that 5 mm defects are large enough to show different results in healing depending on treatment; therefore, 5 mm is a viable size for further studies on bone healing.
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.