ArticleACS biomaterials science & engineering2025
Osseointegration of 3D-Printable Polyetheretherketone-Magnesium Phosphate Bioactive Composites for Craniofacial and Orthopedic Implants.
Article in ACS biomaterials science & engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Material and Geometric Innovations in Lumbar and Cervical Interbody Devices: A Systematic Scoping Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Article
- Biodegradable and osteoconductive sodium alginate-gelatin/amorphous magnesium phosphate 3D-printed scaffolds for craniofacial bone regeneration.Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2026Article
- Advances in 3D Printed Scaffolds for Periodontal Regeneration.Current oral health reports · 2026Review
- Influence of fused deposition modeling parameters on the mechanical and thermal properties of 3D-printed PEEK dental endosseous implants.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2026Article
- Application of Amorphous Nanomaterials in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a high-performance polymer material for developing varying orthopedic, spine, cranial, maxillofacial, and dental implants. Despite their commendable mechanical properties and biocompatibility, the major limitation of PEEK implants is their low affinity to osseointegrate with the neighboring bone. Over the last two decades, several efforts have been made to incorporate bioactive components such as bioceramic particles in PEEK to enhance its osseointegration capacity. However, one major limitation is that the bioceramic particles embedded in the PEEK matrix can degrade over time, compromising the implant's long-term bioactivity and mechanical properties. To address this limitation, in this study, we utilized a unique bioceramic known as amorphous magnesium phosphate (AMP). AMP is a metastable phase of magnesium phosphate that nanocrystallizes in a physiological medium to stable bioactive phases exhibiting low degradation kinetics and high bioactivity. Thus, based on this property of AMP, we hypothesize that AMP-PEEK composites will exhibit sustained biodegradation kinetics, help maintain long-term osseointegration, and inhibit mechanical property degradation. Herein, we reported on a detailed
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.