English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The need to treat the bone defects arises throughout the whole spectrum of orthopaedic surgery. It is possible to produce materials with specific mechanical properties, architecture and biodegradability. The essential attributes for regeneration of new osseous tissue include biocompatibility, osteointegration, osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity and osteogenicity. Biocompatibility means that the immunogenic response and foreign body reactions to the implanted material are minimised or absent. Osteointegration is defined as a process leading to close bonding of the newly formed mineralised tissue with the implant material. Beyond these bone regeneration essentials, other matrix properties can influence the suitability of a material for its intended clinical applications, such as surface roughness, the mechanical integrity of the matrix and the matrix’s porosity [1]. Several osteoconductive bone graft substitutes are available for clinical application, including coralline hydroxyapatite, collagen-based matrices, calcium phosphates, calcium sulphate and deproteinised bovine bone. These materials vary substantially in tems of their chemical composition, mechanical properties and biodegradability. Orthopaedic surgeons should understand the differences between the various bone graft substitutes to ensure they select a material that provides the desired properties for the intended clinical application. An ideal synthetic bone graft substitute should be a porous matrix with interconnecting porosity that promotes rapid bone ingrowth, and at the same time, it should possess a sufficient strength to prevent its crushing under physiological loads during osteointegration and healing. Hydroxyapatite (Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2), ┚-tricalcium phosphate (Ca3(PO4)2), their derivatives and combinations are the most commonly used ceramic materials in orthopaedics. While hydroxyapatite ceramic materials provide an osteoconductive matrix for bone ingrowth and ongrowth, slow in-vivo resorption profiles can potentially limit their clinical applications [2]. Although ┚-tricalcium phosphate ceramic has been studied substantially in animal models and its biocompatibility, osteoconductivity and resorbability have been reported, there have been only limited data regarding long-term outcome of its clinical use in surgery for bone tumours [3-12]. However, the informations about biological responses such as bone bonding and resorption of ceramics are very important in clinical applications [13-15].

Comparison of Apatite-Wollastonite Glass-Ceramic and β-tricalcium Phosphate used as Bone Graft Substitutes after Curettage of Bone Cysts