The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2022
DOI: 10.1080/00914037.2022.2052729
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Current and future perspectives on biomaterials for segmental mandibular defect repair

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 148 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Traditional methods are becoming increasingly difficult to meet the requirements of precise mandibular reconstruction because of the 3D anatomical structure and complex function of the face. The latest research mentioned the use of biomaterials for mandibular defects, allogeneic transplantation of facial tissue, and drug-induced rapid distraction osteogenesis ( De Paz et al, 2021 ; Al Maruf et al, 2022 ; Shen et al, 2022 ), providing a new idea for the study of mandibular defects. In summary, combined with the bibliometric analysis, among the various methods of reconstruction in the field of mandibular defects, we consider that accurate mandibular reconstruction and tissue engineering bone regeneration technologies are research hotspots and frontiers in this field.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditional methods are becoming increasingly difficult to meet the requirements of precise mandibular reconstruction because of the 3D anatomical structure and complex function of the face. The latest research mentioned the use of biomaterials for mandibular defects, allogeneic transplantation of facial tissue, and drug-induced rapid distraction osteogenesis ( De Paz et al, 2021 ; Al Maruf et al, 2022 ; Shen et al, 2022 ), providing a new idea for the study of mandibular defects. In summary, combined with the bibliometric analysis, among the various methods of reconstruction in the field of mandibular defects, we consider that accurate mandibular reconstruction and tissue engineering bone regeneration technologies are research hotspots and frontiers in this field.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although autologous bone flaps are effective in restoring bone continuity, long and complex operations are required and are associated with substantial donor site morbidity. For some cases autologous bone is not suitable for replicating the complex 3D geometries, as in the facial region of the skull. Bone tissue engineering provides a feasible alternative by enabling the design and manufacture of tissue scaffolds, which support tissue regeneration via cell adhesion and nutrient transport. Unlike free flaps, tissue scaffolds can be additively manufactured so that they are patient specific, enabling the scaffold to match the actual size and shape of the defect. Scaffold architecture, biomaterials selection, additive manufacturing, implantation, and performance evaluation are crucial steps that need to be carefully planned and implemented to ensure optimal experimental and clinical outcomes. For oral cancer patients, there are additional challenges that are not often encountered in long bone defects, such as oral microflora, postoperative radiotherapy, and cantilever loading.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The immediate and long-term goals typically differ, with osteogenic strategies employed to support bone growth that ultimately achieves the desired mechanical stability and in the case of injury, regenerative capacity. Various biomaterials including polycaprolactone (PCL), polyether ether ketone (PEEK), polyetherketone ketone (PEKK), ceramics, metals, polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), polyglycolic acid (PGA), and polylactic acid (PLA) hydrogels have been extensively researched for bone regeneration [ 4 ]. An ideal biomaterial must be safe, biocompatible, cytocompatible (non-cytotoxic or do not cause harm to the cells), bioinert (when implanted, has minimal interaction with its surrounding tissue), bioactive (has a biological effect), biostable, and biodegradable [ 5 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Osteoinduction requires the scaffold to provide structural support for progenitor cells and a biological environment that favours osteogenic differentiation, proliferation, and mineralization [ 11 ]. Significant progress in the field of biomaterials has been evident over recent decades [ 4 ]. However, segmental mandibular defects of the mandible are a particularly challenging clinical scenario because of the microorganism-rich environment, minimal soft tissue cover, the consistent requirement for adjuvant radiotherapy, complex geometry, specialised anatomical structures (teeth), and high-stress axial and non-axial (cantilever) loading [ 4 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation