Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Bone substitutes in 2003: an overview.

C Delloye1, N Cnockaert, O Cornu

  • 1Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie, Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc, 53, avenue Mounier, B-1200 Bruxelles, Belgium. delloye@orto.ucl.ac.be

Acta Orthopaedica Belgica
|April 2, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Periprosthetic joint infection after oncologic mega-implant reconstruction using a 24-hour cefazolin prophylaxis: a monocentric retrospective cohort study.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same author

Clinical evaluation of occlusive dressing in fingertip reconstruction.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same author

How to predict structural allograft survival in tibial reconstructions.

Cell and tissue banking·2025
Same author

Can we DAIR in FRI ? Debridement techniques in osteomyelitis.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2025
Same author

Risk factors and complications in surgical management of proximal humeral fractures: a retrospective analysis of 132 cases.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2025
Same author

Improved outcomes with surgical management of clavicular fractures? A retrospective study of matched pairs comparing conservative and surgical approach.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2025
Same journal

Beyond the Field of View: Enhancing Detection of Orthopaedic Metastases in Cancer Staging.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same journal

Diaphyseal intramedullary osteoid osteoma: an enigmatic subtype.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same journal

Limb Salvage in Infected Tibial Nonunion with Bone Loss: A Case Report of a Modified Masquelet-Ilizarov Technique.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same journal

Solitary Fibrous Tumor Developing Two Years After Primary Cranial Synovial Sarcoma: A Rare Case.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same journal

Pseudotumor After Ceramic-on-Ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Report.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
Same journal

Prediction of Sustentaculum Tali Sustentacular Screw Length based on Linear Regression Model.

Acta orthopaedica Belgica·2026
See all related articles

This review compares bone substitutes available in Belgium, highlighting limited data on biological value and advocating for in vivo testing. It also explores biomolecules and cell therapy, noting regulatory challenges.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic Surgery
  • Biomaterials Science
  • Regenerative Medicine

Background:

  • Bone defect treatment relies on various bone graft substitutes.
  • Clinical application requires specific biological and mechanical properties.
  • Current market offerings include autografts, allografts, xenografts, and synthetic materials.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review and compare available bone substitutes in Belgium.
  • To assess their biological and mechanical properties for clinical use.
  • To explore novel approaches like biomolecules and cell therapy.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative review of bone graft materials.
  • Analysis of biological and mechanical properties.
  • Literature review of biomolecules and cell therapy advancements.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Bone autografts, allografts, demineralized bone, xenografts, coral, calcium sulfate, calcium phosphate, ionic cement, and bioactive glass were evaluated.
  • Significant data gaps exist regarding the biological value of many bone substitutes.
  • Biomolecules (BMP-2, OP-1) and cell therapy show promise but require further validation.

Conclusions:

  • In vivo validation is crucial for assessing bone substitute efficacy.
  • The combination of medical devices, grafts, drugs, and cells presents complex regulatory hurdles in Europe.
  • Further research is needed to optimize bone regeneration strategies and navigate legal frameworks.