2017
DOI: 10.1089/ten.tec.2017.0148
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tissue Engineering Strategies to Improve Osteogenesis in the Juvenile Swine Alveolar Cleft Model

Abstract: Alveolar (gumline) clefts are the most common congenital bone defect in humans, affecting 1 in 700 live births. Treatment to repair these bony defects relies on autologous, cancellous bone transfer from the iliac crest. This harvest requires a second surgical site with increased surgical time associated with potential complications, while providing only limited cancellous bone. Improvements in treatment protocols that avoid these limitations would be beneficial to patients with clefts and other craniofacial bo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An ideal pediatric bone replacement or regenerative therapeutic agent would be biocompatible, patient specific, bioresorbable, lead to the regeneration of mature, vascularized bone and ultimately restore form and function of the skeleton without impeding facial development 16,18 . Due to these unique considerations, efficacious translation of bone tissue engineering strategies in a pediatric context have been limited and investigation into pediatric skeletal tissue engineering strategies remains in its infancy 20,21 . We seek to evaluate a novel tissue regeneration strategy that may begin to fulfill these criteria for successful translation to a pediatric craniofacial context by investigating both a cleft and calvarial surgical defect model.…”
Section: Pediatric Bone Tissue Engineeringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An ideal pediatric bone replacement or regenerative therapeutic agent would be biocompatible, patient specific, bioresorbable, lead to the regeneration of mature, vascularized bone and ultimately restore form and function of the skeleton without impeding facial development 16,18 . Due to these unique considerations, efficacious translation of bone tissue engineering strategies in a pediatric context have been limited and investigation into pediatric skeletal tissue engineering strategies remains in its infancy 20,21 . We seek to evaluate a novel tissue regeneration strategy that may begin to fulfill these criteria for successful translation to a pediatric craniofacial context by investigating both a cleft and calvarial surgical defect model.…”
Section: Pediatric Bone Tissue Engineeringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Craniomaxillofacial injuries represent up to 26% of all battlefield injuries, as occurred in Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) 1 ( Lew et al, 2010 ; U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command, 2019 ). Craniofacial defects are also a common birth defect (1:700), which poses significant challenges for the health and development of, and reparative therapies for, affected children whose facial bones are actively growing ( Caballero et al, 2017 ). Large CMF boney defects caused by tumor resection, trauma, and birth defects commonly require highly specialized surgical interventions due to the limited regenerative potential of craniofacial bones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of additive manufacturing techniques for a customized replication of the architecture of the skull and bony defects, based on tomographic data, would facilitate the achievement of this ambitious purpose, promoting surgical placement and retention of the engineered scaffold. Therefore, based on such considerations, the application of bone tissue engineering strategies in this specific pediatric context is limited and at an infancy state [202]. Nevertheless, the everlasting efforts of the scientific community have achieved some specific advancements in the field of novel biomaterials and drug delivery systems.…”
Section: Clinical Perspectives and Actual Clinical Translationmentioning
confidence: 99%