Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41560843›Full record

ReviewMaterials today. Bio2026

Recent advances in biomaterials for bone regeneration: Bridging innovation and clinical translation.

Zahra Sabouri, Mélanie Dequeecker, Houmam Anees, Fatemeh Rastegar Adib, Reem Jamous, Junwen Zheng, Xiaolong Lyu, Sabine Stoetzel, Christian Heiss, Thaqif El Khassawna and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials today. Bio, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Zahra SabouriExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Mélanie DequeeckerExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Houmam AneesExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Fatemeh Rastegar AdibExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Reem JamousExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Junwen ZhengExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Xiaolong LyuExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Sabine StoetzelExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Christian HeissExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Thaqif El KhassawnaExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.
Vahid JahedExperimental Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone regeneration presents an enduring clinical barrier, particularly with the projected rise in osteoporotic fractures exceeding 6 million annually by 2050. Autografts, allografts, and xenografts remain foundational in bone repair due to their inherent osteogenic, osteoconductive, and osteoinductive capacities. However, issues such as donor site morbidity, immunogenicity, limited graft availability, and pathogen transmission risks limit their applicability. In response, recent developments in biomaterials, including ion-doped bioceramics, bioactive glass-polymer composites, and stem cell-functionalized hydrogels, aim to replicate the hierarchical structure and biochemical microenvironment of native bone. This review surveys advancements in scaffold materials over the past five years, evaluating their physicochemical properties, immune modulation potential, and clinical readiness within the context of bone tissue engineering (BTE). Specific attention is given to strategies for selecting appropriate biomaterials based on clinical needs, considering their physical and biological properties, as well as their respective advantages and limitations. Despite this progress, clinical translation remains limited; only a few engineered scaffolds have achieved regulatory approval for routine use. To accelerate adoption, efforts must focus on scalable fabrication, quantitative immune profiling, and scaffold degradation monitoring to bridge preclinical performance with clinical efficacy.

Indexed as

Bone regenerationComposite materialsMineral-based biomaterialsNatural biomaterialsSynthetic biomaterials

Identifiers

PMID41560843
PMCPMC12813235

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.