Literature DB >> 11937865

Nonallograft osteoconductive bone graft substitutes.

Robert W Bucholz1.   

Abstract

An estimated 500,000 to 600,000 bone grafting procedures are done annually in the United States. Approximately (1/2) of these surgeries involve spinal arthrodesis whereas 35% to 40% are used for general orthopaedic applications. Synthetic bone graft substitutes currently represent only 10% of the bone graft market, but their share is increasing as experience and confidence in their use are accrued. Despite 15 to 20 years of clinical experience with various synthetic substitutes, there have been few welldesigned, controlled clinical trials of these implants. Synthetic bone graft substitutes consist of hydroxyapatite, tricalcium phosphate, calcium sulfate, or a combination of these minerals. Their fabrication technique, crystallinity, pore dimensions, mechanical properties, and resorption rate vary. All synthetic porous substitutes share numerous advantages over autografts and allografts including their unlimited supply, easy sterilization, and storage. However, the degree to which the substitute provides an osteoconductive structural framework or matrix for new bone ingrowth differs among implants. Disadvantages of ceramic implants include brittle handling properties, variable rates of resorption, poor performance in diaphyseal defects, and potentially adverse effects on normal bone remodeling. These inherent weaknesses have refocused their primary use to bone graft extenders and carriers for pharmaceuticals. The composition, histologic features, indications, and clinical experience of several of the synthetic bone graft substitutes approved for orthopaedic use in the United States are reviewed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11937865     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200202000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  70 in total

1.  Osseointegration in hip prostheses: experimental study in sheep.

Authors:  C Doria; V De Santis; G Falcone; L Proietti; E De Santis
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2003-06-17       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Runx2 overexpression in bone marrow stromal cells accelerates bone formation in critical-sized femoral defects.

Authors:  Abigail M Wojtowicz; Kellie L Templeman; Dietmar W Hutmacher; Robert E Guldberg; Andrés J García
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.845

3.  Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles as Injectable Bone Substitute Material in a Vertical Bone Augmentation Model.

Authors:  Aoi Kaneko; Eriko Marukawa; Hiroyuki Harada
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  An open-pored gelatin/hydroxyapatite composite as a potential bone substitute.

Authors:  William B Hillig; Y Choi; S Murthy; S Murtha; N Natravali; P Ajayan
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  [Bone substitutes in scoliosis surgery].

Authors:  T Lerner; H Griefingholt; U Liljenqvist
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.087

6.  The clinical use of allografts, demineralized bone matrices, synthetic bone graft substitutes and osteoinductive growth factors: a survey study.

Authors:  Mathias P G Bostrom; Daniel A Seigerman
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2005-09

7.  Dexamethasone-loaded hydroxyapatite enhances bone regeneration in rat calvarial defects.

Authors:  Reza Tavakoli-darestani; Alireza Manafi-rasi; Amin Kamrani-rad
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 2.316

8.  Immature myeloid cells are critical for enhancing bone fracture healing through angiogenic cascade.

Authors:  Seth Levy; Joseph M Feduska; Anandi Sawant; Shawn R Gilbert; Jonathan A Hensel; Selvarangan Ponnazhagan
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 4.398

9.  Global burden of trauma: Need for effective fracture therapies.

Authors:  George Mathew; Beate P Hanson
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Bone defects following curettage do not necessarily need augmentation.

Authors:  Martti Hirn; Uday de Silva; Sujith Sidharthan; Robert J Grimer; Adesegun Abudu; Roger M Tillman; Simon R Carter
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.