2019
DOI: 10.1002/term.2970
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving intraoperative storage conditions for autologous bone grafts: An experimental investigation in mice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Adding autograft to bovine BGSs, however, negates the benefit of using a bone graft extender. A second surgical site must still be prepared; there may still be inadequate material; and if the patient is elderly, the autograft will likely have diminished osteogenic potential (Sun et al, 2019). On its own, a bovine BGS resists resorption (Figure 4) and its persistence at grafted sites stands in marked contrast to the resorption of bone in autografted sites (Korlof et al, 1973; Johansson et al, 2001; Schlegel et al, 2003).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Adding autograft to bovine BGSs, however, negates the benefit of using a bone graft extender. A second surgical site must still be prepared; there may still be inadequate material; and if the patient is elderly, the autograft will likely have diminished osteogenic potential (Sun et al, 2019). On its own, a bovine BGS resists resorption (Figure 4) and its persistence at grafted sites stands in marked contrast to the resorption of bone in autografted sites (Korlof et al, 1973; Johansson et al, 2001; Schlegel et al, 2003).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since BGSs primarily function as scaffolds, we also tested whether combining a pro‐osteogenic protein could accelerate the rate of graft consolidation, on par with an autograft. WNT proteins are expressed in native bone (Bloebaum et al, 2007) and in autografts (Jing et al, 2015; Sun et al, 2019). When L‐WNT3A is combined with a graft, its bone‐forming capacity is significantly increased (Jing et al, 2015; Salmon et al, 2017; Coyac et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Autologous bone grafting is the gold standard for generating new bone at sites requiring reconstruction 27–30 . A key to the success of autografting was revealed when investigators showed that “osteogenic cells from the bone itself” contributed directly to new bone formation 28,31,32 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Autologous bone grafting is the gold standard for generating new bone at sites requiring reconstruction. [27][28][29][30] F I G U R E 2 Osseo-shaping tool-generated bone debris is retained on-site. A) in a conventional protocol involving a fresh extraction socket, μCT 2-dimensional section of the space between the crestal region of the implant and the socket wall (yellow dotted line).…”
Section: Does Bone Debris Contribute To Implant Osseointegration?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The consolidation phase is directly influenced by the bone graft origin, but the optimal source remains an area of intense debate (Yamada & Egusa, 2018). Autologous bone grafts (autografts), which contain a mineralized matrix scaffold, growth factors, and mitotically active osteoprogenitor cells (Maddalone et al., 2018; Sun et al., 2019), generally appear to be superior to allografts and xenografts in this regard (Buser et al., 1998; Chiapasco et al., 2009; Klijn et al., 2010). It should be emphasized that there is a knowledge gap in actual data demonstrating this potential.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%