ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2026
Cryostorable callus mimetics support endochondral bone regeneration in a large-animal maxillofacial defect.
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Endochondral bone regeneration (EBR) is a developmentally inspired strategy based on a pre-formed cartilage template that remodels in vivo into vascularized bone. Although EBR has shown promise in orthopedic settings, its application to maxillofacial reconstruction remains largely unexplored in large animal models, particularly because maxillofacial bone is classically formed by intramembranous ossification. Here, we present soft callus mimetics (CMs) as bioactive, devitalized cartilage modules that preserve extracellular matrix-encoded cues capable of instructing endochondral ossification without viable donor cells. Their regenerative performance was evaluated in a split-mouth bilateral goat alveolar cleft model (n = 10), in which CMs were implanted in one cleft and autologous iliac crest bone graft in the contralateral cleft. Across microCT, histomorphometry, and fluorochrome labeling, CM-treated defects supported bone regeneration and remodeling without evidence of inferior early structural outcomes compared with autograft. In a separate rat subcutaneous implantation study, CMs retained osteoinductive capacity after 9 months of cryostorage compared with previously reported fresh CMs implanted under matched, non-concurrent conditions. Together, these findings support the biological feasibility of CM-driven endochondral bone regeneration in a large animal maxillofacial environment and the further development of cryostorable CMs for bone 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.