ReviewRegenerative biomaterials2026
Synergistic integration of biomaterials in orthopedic implantation for infection preventing and tissue engineering.
Review in Regenerative biomaterials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Clinical Outcomes and Biomechanical Considerations of Graft Selection-A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
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
The treatment of infected bone defects (IBD) is challenging in orthopedics because of their complex pathological mechanisms and high recurrence rates. An ideal therapeutic strategy should simultaneously eradicate infection and promote bone regeneration. However, conventional approaches rarely achieve both objectives effectively. It has concurrently high recurrence rates, prolonged treatment courses and limited therapeutic efficacy. Clinically, implant-associated infections leading to IBD are often exacerbated by patients'underlying diseases, material-related risks and perioperative factors, thereby necessitating multifunctional strategies to achieve an integrated solution. With the rapid development of bone graft materials, researchers have focused on biocomposites because of their unique multifunctionality. By integrating the advantages of different materials and incorporating various bioactive components, biocomposites allow comprehensive treatment of patients with IBD. In this article, we reviewed the advancements in the application of different types of biocomposites in treating IBD, highlighting their synergistic effects in promoting bone healing and combating infections through various mechanisms. Additionally, it addresses the limitations associated with clinical translation and proposes a regulatory science-based framework for full lifecycle assessment. This framework offers a standardized evaluation system and precise regulatory strategies for personalized biocomposites with multiple functions. These insights provide scientific support and reveal novel approaches for clinical applications.
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.