-
Journal of Controlled Release :... Jan 2024Zeolite imidazolate framework-8 (ZIF-8) is a biomaterial that has been increasingly studied in recent years. It has several applications such as bone regeneration,... (Review)
Review
Zeolite imidazolate framework-8 (ZIF-8) is a biomaterial that has been increasingly studied in recent years. It has several applications such as bone regeneration, promotion of angiogenesis, drug loading, and antibacterial activity, and exerts multiple effects to deal with various problems in the process of bone regeneration. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the applications and effectiveness of ZIF-8 in bone regeneration. A search of papers published in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases revealed 532 relevant studies. Title, abstract, and full-text screening resulted in 39 papers being included in the review, including 39 in vitro and 22 animal studies. Appropriate concentrations of nano ZIF-8 can promote cell proliferation and osteogenic differentiation by releasing Zn and entering the cell, whereas high doses of ZIF-8 are cytotoxic and inhibit osteogenic differentiation. In addition, five studies confirmed that ZIF-8 exhibits good vasogenic activity. In all in vivo experiments, nano ZIF-8 promoted bone formation. These results indicate that, at appropriate concentrations, materials containing ZIF-8 promote bone regeneration more than materials without ZIF-8, and with characteristics such as promoting angiogenesis, drug loading, and antibacterial activity, it is expected to show promising applications in the field of bone regeneration. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: This manuscript reviewed the use of ZIF-8 in bone regeneration, clarified the biocompatibility and effectiveness in promoting bone regeneration of ZIF-8 materials, and discussed the possible mechanisms and factors affecting its promotion of bone regeneration. Overall, this study provides a better understanding of the latest advances in the field of bone regeneration of ZIF-8, serves as a design guide, and contributes to the design of future experimental studies.
Topics: Animals; Osteogenesis; Zeolites; Bone Regeneration; Biocompatible Materials; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 38042375
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2023.11.049 -
Frontiers in Bioengineering and... 2023Bioactive glasses (BGs) are ideal biomaterials in the field of bio-restoration due to their excellent biocompatibility. Titanium alloys are widely used as a bone graft...
Bioactive glasses (BGs) are ideal biomaterials in the field of bio-restoration due to their excellent biocompatibility. Titanium alloys are widely used as a bone graft substitute material because of their excellent corrosion resistance and mechanical properties; however, their biological inertness makes them prone to clinical failure. Surface modification of titanium alloys with bioactive glass can effectively combine the superior mechanical properties of the substrate with the biological properties of the coating material. In this review, the relevant articles published from 2013 to the present were searched in four databases, namely, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, and after screening, 49 studies were included. We systematically reviewed the basic information and the study types of the included studies, which comprise experiments, animal tests, and clinical trials. In addition, we summarized the applied coating technologies, which include pulsed laser deposition (PLD), electrophoretic deposition, dip coating, and magnetron sputtering deposition. The superior biocompatibility of the materials in terms of cytotoxicity, cell activity, hemocompatibility, anti-inflammatory properties, bioactivity, and their good bioactivity in terms of osseointegration, osteogenesis, angiogenesis, and soft tissue adhesion are discussed. We also analyzed the advantages of the existing materials and the prospects for further research. Even though the current research status is not extensive enough, it is still believed that BG-coated Ti implants have great clinical application prospects.
PubMed: 38033819
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1269223 -
Neurosurgical Review Nov 2023Revision surgery for OPLL is undesirable for both patients and physicians. However, the risk factors for reoperation are not clear. Thus, we sought to review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Revision surgery for OPLL is undesirable for both patients and physicians. However, the risk factors for reoperation are not clear. Thus, we sought to review the existing literature and determine the factors associated with higher reoperation rates in patients with OPLL. A search was performed using Pubmed, Embase, Web of Sciences, and Ovid to include studies regarding the risk factors of reoperation for OPLL. RoBANS (Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Nonrandomized Studies) was used for risk of bias analysis. Heterogeneity of studies and publication bias was assessed, and sensitivity analysis was performed. Statistical analysis was performed with a p-value < 0.05 using SPSS software (version 23). Twenty studies with 129 reoperated and 2,793 non-reoperated patients were included. The pooled reoperation rate was 5% (95% CI: 4% to 7). The most common cause of reoperation was residual OPLL or OPLL progression (n = 51, 39.53%). An increased risk of additional surgery was found with pre-operative cervical or thoracic angle (Standardized mean difference = -0.44; 95% CI: -0.69 to -0.19; p = 0.0061), post-operative CSF leak (Odds ratio, OR = 4.97; 95% CI: 2.48 to 9.96; p = 0.0005), and graft and/or hardware failure (OR = 192.09; 95% CI: 6.68 to 5521.69; p = 0.0101). Apart from the factors identified in our study, the association of other variables with the risk of second surgery could not be ruled out, owing to the complexity of the relationship and significant bias in the current literature.
Topics: Humans; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome; Osteogenesis; Longitudinal Ligaments; Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament; Risk Factors; Cervical Vertebrae; Decompression, Surgical; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37996772
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-023-02215-w -
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Jun 2024The study aimed to summarize current knowledge regarding the use of orthopaedic functional appliances (OFA) in managing unilateral craniofacial microsomia (UCM). The... (Review)
Review
The study aimed to summarize current knowledge regarding the use of orthopaedic functional appliances (OFA) in managing unilateral craniofacial microsomia (UCM). The eligibility criteria for the review were (1) assessing use of OFA as a stand-alone treatment and (2) using OFA in combination during or after MDO. The PICO (population, intervention, comparison and outcome) format formulated clinical questions with defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. No limitations concerning language and publication year were applied. Information sources: A literature search of Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science databases without restrictions up to 30 September 2022. The risk of bias was assessed. According to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines, two independent authors conducted data extraction. The level of evidence for included articles was evaluated based on the Oxford evidence-based medicine database. Due to the heterogeneity of studies and insufficient data for statistical pooling, meta-analysis was not feasible. Therefore, the results were synthesized narratively. A total of 437 articles were retrieved. Of these, nine met inclusion criteria: five assessing OFA and four assessing OFA during or after MDO. There is limited evidence to suggest that stand-alone and combination treatment with OFA is beneficial for treating mild-to-moderate UCM-related dentofacial deformities in short term. No studies assessed the burden of care. In the management of UCM, there is insufficient evidence supporting the efficacy of OFA as a stand-alone treatment or when combined with MDO. Additionally, there is a lack of evidence regarding treatment protocols and the effect on the condyles and the TMJ. The study was registered at Prospero database number CRD42020204969.
Topics: Humans; Goldenhar Syndrome; Orthodontic Appliances, Functional
PubMed: 37987216
DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12729 -
Prenatal Diagnosis Dec 2023To investigate the maternal and fetal safety of In utero stem cell transplantation (IUSCT).
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the maternal and fetal safety of In utero stem cell transplantation (IUSCT).
METHODS
Medline®, Embase and Cochrane library (1967-2023) search for publications reporting IUSCT in humans. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full-text papers.
RESULTS
Sixty six transplantation procedures in 52 fetuses were performed for haemoglobinopathies (n = 14), red cell/bleeding disorders (n = 4), immunodeficiencies (n = 15), storage disorders (n = 7), osteogenesis imperfecta (n = 2) and healthy fetuses (n = 10). The average gestational age was 18.9 weeks; of procedures reporting the injection route, cells were delivered by intraperitoneal (n = 37), intravenous (n = 19), or intracardiac (n = 4) injection or a combination (n = 3); most fetuses received one injection (n = 41). Haematopoietic (n = 40) or mesenchymal (n = 12) stem cells were delivered. The cell dose was inconsistently reported (range 1.8-3.3 × 10 cells total (n = 27); 2.7-5.0 × 10 /kg estimated fetal weight (n = 17)). The acute fetal procedural complication rate was 4.5% (3/66); the acute fetal mortality rate was 3.0% (2/66). Neonatal survival was 69.2% (36/52). Immediate maternal and pregnancy outcomes were reported in only 30.8% (16/52) and 44.2% (23/52) of cases respectively. Four fetal/pregnancy outcomes would also classify as ≥ Grade 2 maternal adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Short-, medium-, and long-term maternal and fetal adverse events should be reported in all IUSCT studies.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Infant; Pregnancy Outcome; Prenatal Care; Fetus; Gestational Age
PubMed: 37975679
DOI: 10.1002/pd.6459 -
Systematic Reviews Nov 2023Symbrachydactyly is a rare congenital malformation of the hand characterized by short or even absent fingers with or without syndactyly, mostly unilaterally present. The...
Symbrachydactyly is a rare congenital malformation of the hand characterized by short or even absent fingers with or without syndactyly, mostly unilaterally present. The hand condition can vary from a small hand to only nubbins on the distal forearm. This study aims to systematically review the surgical management options for symbrachydactyly and compare functional and aesthetic outcomes.The review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Literature was systematically assessed searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and PROSPERO databases up to January 1, 2023. Studies were identified using synonyms for 'symbrachydactyly' and 'treatment'. Inclusion criteria were the report of outcomes after surgical treatment of symbrachydactyly in humans. Studies were excluded if they were written in another language than English, German, or French. Case reports, letters to the editor, studies on animals, cadaveric, in vitro studies, biomechanical reports, surgical technique description, and papers discussing traumatic or oncologic cases were excluded.Twenty-four studies published were included with 539 patients (1037 digit corrections). Only one study included and compared two surgical techniques. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and ranged from 25 to 47. The range of motion was the main reported outcome and demonstrated modest results in all surgical techniques. The report on aesthetics of the hand was limited in non-vascularized transfers to 2/8 studies and in vascularized transfers to 5/8 studies, both reporting satisfactory results. On average, there was a foot donor site complication rate of 22% in non-vascularized transfers, compared to 2% in vascularized transfers. The hand-related complication rate of 54% was much higher in the vascularized group than in the non-vascularized transfer with 16%.No uniform strategy to surgically improve symbrachydactyly exists. All discussed techniques show limited functional improvement with considerable complication rates, with the vascularized transfer showing relative high hand-related complications and the non-vascularized transfer showing relative high foot-related complications.There were no high-quality studies, and due to a lack of comparing studies, the data could only be analysed qualitatively. Systematic assessment of studies showed insufficient evidence to determine superiority of any procedure to treat symbrachydactyly due to inadequate study designs and comparative studies. This systematic review was registered at the National Institute for Health Research PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews number: CRD42020153590 and received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Level of evidenceI.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020153590.
PubMed: 37974291
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02362-7 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Nov 2023Ilizarov method has become one of primary methods for treating bone defects. Currently, there is growing trend in the application of modified Ilizarov methods (e.g.,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ilizarov method has become one of primary methods for treating bone defects. Currently, there is growing trend in the application of modified Ilizarov methods (e.g., applying unilateral external fixators or with flap tissue) and its combined methods (e.g., Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer or internal fixation) to manage bone defects. However, there is a lack of studies with systematical evaluation of the clinical effects of these evolving methods. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for overall evaluating the clinical effects on long bone defects of lower extremity in Ilizarov methods and its combined methods.
METHODS
Studies were identified in three electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library) from the earliest indexing year through November 01, 2022, and relevant data were extracted subsequently. The total number of participants, number of participants with bone unions, bone result or functional result, and related complications including pin infection, pin loosening, pain, refracture, limb discrepancy, malalignment, joint stiffness, recurrent infection, and amputation were extracted in this study. Then, union rate (defined as the proportion of patients who achieved bone unions) and specific complication incidence rate (defined as the proportion of patients who experienced specific complication) were pooled estimated respectively. Relative risk (RR) was used for comparing the clinical effects among various Ilizarov technique.
RESULTS
Sixty-eight case series studies, 29 comparative studies, and 3 randomized clinical trials were finally included. The union rate of Ilizarov methods was 99.29% (95% CI: 98.67% ~ 99.86%) in tibial defects and 98.81% (95% CI: 98.81% ~ 100.00%) in femoral defects. The union rate of Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer and intramedullary nail in tibial defects was 99.58% (95% CI: 98.05% ~ 100.00%) and 95.02% (95% CI: 87.28% ~ 100.00%), respectively. Compared to the Ilizarov methods, the union rate of the Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer in tibial defects increased slightly (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01 ~ 1.04). Meanwhile, compared to Ilizarov methods, we found lower excellent rate in bone result in Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer, with the moderate to high heterogeneity. Compared to the Ilizarov method, lower rate of pin infection, higher rate of recurrent infection and amputation were observed in Ilizarov method with intramedullary nail, however, the findings about the comparison of pin infection and recurrent infection between the two groups were presented with high degree of statistical heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
Our study confirmed the reliable treatment of Ilizarov methods and its combined technique on long bone defects, and founded there were significant differences on some complications rate between Ilizarov methods and its combined technique. However, the findings need to be confirmed by further studies.
Topics: Humans; Ilizarov Technique; Reinfection; Treatment Outcome; Tibia; External Fixators; Lower Extremity; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Retrospective Studies; Tibial Fractures
PubMed: 37968675
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-07001-9 -
Spine Feb 2024A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
This study systematically reviewed and evaluated the safety and efficacy of spinal endoscopic techniques as a treatment for thoracic ligamentum flavum ossification (TOLF).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
The use of spinal endoscopic techniques for the treatment of TOLF has increased in recent years. The present study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis focused on the use of spinal endoscopic techniques for TOLF.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The Cochrane Central, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were systematically searched for studies focused on patients undergoing spinal endoscopic techniques to treat symptomatic TOLF.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 23 studies. We included 323 patients (177 males, 146 females) with a mean age of 58.40±10.06 years, with 304 total recorded lesion locations of which 245 were located in the lower thoracic spine. Complications affected 35/323 patients, and the mean operative duration for 305 patients was 108.15±47.34 minutes. For 187 patients, the mean operative bleeding was 25.13±12.54 mL, while for 87 patients the mean duration of hospitalization was 4.59±1.93 days. At last follow-up, functional assessment was performed for 260 patients, of whom 200 were in excellent condition, visual analog scale (VAS) scores were assessed for 160 patients, with a mean improvement of 4.40 (3.95, 4.86) Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were recorded for 115 patients, with a mean improvement of 3.49 (2.79,4.18), and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) scores were recorded for 208 patients, with a mean improvement of 3.62 (2.89,4.35).
CONCLUSIONS
These results support several advantages of spinal endoscopic techniques for the treatment of symptomatic TOLF. These include low complication rates, rapid postoperative recovery, and good functional recovery when used for single-segment, non-nodular ossification and no combined dural ossification.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Osteogenesis; Thoracic Vertebrae; Ossification, Heterotopic; Laminectomy; Decompression, Surgical; Ligamentum Flavum; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37937419
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004866 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Nov 2023The OPG/RANKL signal pathway was important regulation mechanism of bone remodeling cycle, but the effect of osteoprotegerin (OPG) and RANKL in osteoporosis was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The OPG/RANKL signal pathway was important regulation mechanism of bone remodeling cycle, but the effect of osteoprotegerin (OPG) and RANKL in osteoporosis was uncertain. We did a systematic review with meta-analysis to assess the association between serum OPG/RANKL and osteoporosis.
METHODS
The systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and meta-analysis were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Randomized controlled studies were searched in PubMed, OvidMedline, Embase (1946 to present). Standard mean difference (SMD), and associated credible interval (CI) were calculated using RevMan statistical software to assess the continuous data. Heterogeneity in studies was measured by I values. Subgroup analysis was performed based on different bone turnover.
RESULTS
A total of 5 randomized controlled studies met the inclusion criteria. Both OPG and RANKL had no significant differences between the osteoporosis and control group, and the statistical heterogeneity was high in meta-analysis. However, RANKL had significant differences between the osteoporosis group with low bone turnover and control group (SMD = - 1.17; 95% CI - 1.77 to 0.57; P value < 0.01) in subanalysis. Furthermore, the OPG/RANKL ratio was significant lower in the osteoporosis group than in the control group (SMD = - 0.29; 95% CI - 0.57 to - 0.02; P value < 0.05), and the statistical heterogeneity was very low (Chi = 0.20, P = 0.66, I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis study supported OPG and RANKL were important modulatory factors of bone formation and resorption in bone turnover, respectively. Although the serum level of both OPG and RANKL were not associated with osteoporosis, but the OPG/RANKL ratio was associated with osteoporosis. In future, standardizing the test method and unit was good to clinical application.
Topics: Humans; Osteoprotegerin; Osteoporosis; Bone Remodeling; Osteogenesis; RANK Ligand; Bone Density
PubMed: 37932757
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04179-5 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Nov 2023Infected tibial non-unions with associated bone loss can be challenging to manage. At present, the two main methods utilized in the management of these fractures include... (Review)
Review
Distraction osteogenesis versus induced membrane technique for infected tibial non-unions with segmental bone loss: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of available studies.
INTRODUCTION
Infected tibial non-unions with associated bone loss can be challenging to manage. At present, the two main methods utilized in the management of these fractures include the Ilizarov technique of Distraction Osteogenesis (DO) using external fixator devices, or alternatively, the Induced Membrane Technique (IMT), devised by Masquelet. As there is a paucity of data directly comparing the outcomes of these techniques, there is no universal agreement on which strategy a surgeon should choose to use.
AIMS
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the outcomes of both DO and IMT, in terms of primary outcomes (bone union and infection elimination), and secondary outcomes (complication rates and functional outcomes).
METHODS
A PRISMA strategy was used. Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar library databases were interrogated using pre-defined MeSH terms and Boolean operators. Quality of evidence was evaluated using OCEBM and GRADE systems.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies with 1136 subjects met the inclusion criteria. With respect to the primary outcomes of interest, union was observed in 94.6% (DO method) and 88.0% (IMT method); this difference, however, was not significant between the two techniques (p = 0.45). In addition, infection elimination rates were also higher in the Ilizarov DO group when compared to Masquelet (Mq) IMT (93.0% vs 80.4% respectively). Again, no significant difference was observed (p = 0.06). For all secondary outcomes assessed (unplanned re-operations, re-fracture rates amputation rate), no statistically significant differences were documented between the treatment options.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrated that there is no clinical difference in outcomes for patients treated with Ilizarov DO versus Mq IMT techniques. The evidence base at present is relatively sparse and, therefore, we would recommend for further Level I studies to be conducted, to make more meaningful conclusions.
PubMed: 37921889
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-023-02375-w