Eva Johanna Kubosch1, Anke Bernstein1, Laura Wolf1, Tobias Fretwurst2, Katja Nelson2, Hagen Schmal3,4,5. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Albert-Ludwigs University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany. 2. Department of Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, Albert-Ludwigs University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Albert-Ludwigs University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany. hagen.schmal@freenet.de. 4. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. hagen.schmal@freenet.de. 5. Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. hagen.schmal@freenet.de.
After publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in the ‘Methods’ section. Within the ‘Patients’ sub-section, the first item in the list of synthetic or highly processed xenogeneic bone substitutes (SBS) should have been given as Orthoss®, rather than BioOss®. The sentence should therefore have read as follows:“The following SBS were used: Orthoss® (Geistlich, Wolhusen, Switzerland) in 41.4 %, and at clearly lower percentages, respectively: Norian SRS® (Synthes) (8.6 %), Chronos® (Synthes) (1.7 %), Atlantik® (Argomedical) (2.6 %), Alaska® (Argomedical) (0.9 %), Endobone® (Biomet) (4.3 %), Pyrost® (Stryker) (0.9 %), Nanostim® (Medtronic) (37.1 %), Actifuse® (Baxter) (0.9 %), Tutobone® (Novomedics) (0.9 %) and PerOssal® (Botiss) (0.9 %).”