2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.02.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surface Characteristics of Biomaterials Used for Space Maintenance in a Mandibular Defect: A Pilot Animal Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[4, 8] Strategies to address stabilization and bone regeneration have typically employed a solid and porous composite structure or a solid structure with degradable porogens to induce porosity. [20, 21] In a study by Kempen et al, a PPF intramedullary rod embedded with poly(DL-lactic- co- glycolic acid) (PLGA) microparticles for growth factor delivery was used. [21]…”
Section: 1 Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[4, 8] Strategies to address stabilization and bone regeneration have typically employed a solid and porous composite structure or a solid structure with degradable porogens to induce porosity. [20, 21] In a study by Kempen et al, a PPF intramedullary rod embedded with poly(DL-lactic- co- glycolic acid) (PLGA) microparticles for growth factor delivery was used. [21]…”
Section: 1 Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently in the United States, a conglomerate of funding sources combined to form the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM), marking a large investment in tissue engineering and biomaterials research with the goal of fostering rapid clinical translation of new technology for the treatment of wounded warriors 80, 81. Within our laboratory, a recent focus toward the goal of increasing applications in which scaffold‐based tissue engineering approaches can be employed has resulted in the development of porous poly(methylmethacrylate) (PMMA) space maintainers to better prepare hostile wound environments for eventual scaffold or construct implantation 82–85. Although these two paths differ in approach and timeline, greater clinical success will only reinforce the potential of biomaterials and tissue engineering, expanding interest and hopefully funding for the development of novel biomaterials that improve upon those in use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Additionally, a separate study by Nyugen et al using PPF constructs in a similar animal model found that porous PPF resulted in less dehiscence when compared with solid implants. 27 Constructs in this study were designed to degrade and become increasingly porous with time to facilitate soft tissue growth over the implant and enable later ingrowth of regenerated bone. MicroCT analysis of constructs over the 8 week degradation study under accelerated conditions showed that porosity continued to increase from day 1 to week 8.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%