ReviewMaterials today. Bio2025
Topography-based implants for bone regeneration: Design, biological mechanism, and therapeutics.
Review in Materials today. Bio, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time-sequentially released bilayer sandwich cerium oxide nanoparticles on femtosecond laser-treated zirconia implant surface for enhanced antibacterial and osseointegration capacity.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Bone Healing Around Implants in Normal and Medically Compromised Conditions: Osteoporosis and Diabetes.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Exosome-enabled bone defect repair: mechanistic foundations, bioengineered delivery, and artificial intelligence-driven translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Sustainable nanomaterials for precision dental medicine: green synthesis, therapeutic applications, and future directions.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Gradient 3D printed PEEK with nano-coating facilitates rapid manufacturing with dual enhanced osteogenic and anti-bacterial property.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the increasing demand for bone defect repair, bone implant materials have emerged as a critical alternative to traditional autologous or allogeneic bone grafts. However, their clinical performance remains limited due to challenges such as prolonged healing times and suboptimal repair quality. Moreover, in patients with certain pathological conditions (e.g., diabetes mellitus and osteoporosis), disruptions in the bone microenvironment further compromise regenerative outcomes. To address these limitations, surface modification strategies have been developed to regulate implant-bone tissue interactions and improve therapeutic efficacy. This review systematically summarizes recent advances in bone regeneration implants with a focus on topographical modifications, encompassing design principles, underlying biological mechanisms, and therapeutic applications. Particular attention is given to the influence of implant surface topography on the biological behaviors of osteoblasts, osteoclasts, and macrophages within the bone microenvironment, as well as their responses under complex pathological and physiological conditions. The review also discusses current challenges related to achieving micro/nanoscale structural balance, personalization, and clinical translation of implant surface topographies, and highlights future directions in precision bone regeneration through multidisciplinary approaches, artificial intelligence-driven optimization, and long-term clinical validation. Collectively, these insights may inform future research on bone implant materials and support the development of novel strategies for personalized treatment of bone defect repair.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.