Journal of Tissue Engineering· 2018Q1· Review
Bone substitutes: a review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management
- 890citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2018year
Short summary
This review highlights common bone substitutes, detailing their characteristics and clinical applications, while identifying limitations in managing large defects and achieving central vascularization.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Bone substitutes include biological (e.g., demineralized bone matrix, hydroxyapatite) and synthetic (e.g., calcium sulfate, bioactive glasses) materials.
- Selection of bone substitutes must be tailored to specific clinical uses like spine fusion, osteotomy, or maxillofacial surgery.
- Major limitations include managing large defects and achieving vascularization in the central part of the substitute.
- Developing porous synthetic substitutes that promote faster, wider vascularization is a promising research direction.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Bone replacement might have been practiced for centuries with various materials of natural origin, but had rarely met success until the late 19th century. Nowadays, many different bone substitutes can be used. They can be either derived from biological products such as demineralized bone matrix, platelet-rich plasma, hydroxyapatite, adjunction of growth factors (like bone morphogenetic protein) or synthetic such as calcium sulfate, tri-calcium phosphate ceramics, bioactive glasses, or polymer-based substitutes. All these substitutes are not suitable for every clinical use, and they have to be chosen selectively depending on their purpose. Thus, this review aims to highlight the principal characteristics of the most commonly used bone substitutes and to give some directions concerning their clinical use, as spine fusion, open-wedge tibial osteotomy, long bone fracture, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or periodontal treatments. However, the main limitations to bone substitutes use remain the management of large defects and the lack of vascularization in their central part, which is likely to appear following their utilization. In the field of bone tissue engineering, developing porous synthetic substitutes able to support a faster and a wider vascularization within their structure seems to be a promising way of research.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Tissue Engineering, 2018 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Urology
UrologyMedicine