ArticleActa neurochirurgica2025
Wax on, wax off: a case report discussing a potential pitfall of dissolvable bone wax substitutes such as Ostene® in neurosurgery.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2025. 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.
- Novel Bioresorbable Bone Wax for Potentiated Hemostasis and Osteogenesis.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Polyethylene Glycol (PEG)-Based Wet-Adhesive Absorbable Bone Wax for Osseous Hemostasis and Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Ostene® on, bleeding off: Discussing the indications and benefits of a water-soluble bone hemostasis material.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone wax alternatives, such as Ostene®, are marketed as substitutes for traditional bone wax, offering the benefits of resorbability, improved bone osteogenesis, and reduced inflammatory reactions, granulomas, and infection risks. However, the limitations of these agents in cranial neurosurgery, particularly for sealing exposed air cells during skull base repair, are underreported. We present an early post-operative case of subcutaneous emphysema, pneumocephalus, and bone flap infection following the failure of Ostene® to provide a durable seal of air cells after temporal craniotomy and tumour resection. This highlights a limitation of Ostene® and other water-soluble bone haemostasis agents in cranial neurosurgery.
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.