Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Treatment of large bone defects in load-bearing bone: traditional and novel bone grafts

Yu D., Shen W., Dai J., Zhu H.

Narrative Review, published in J Zhejiang Univ Sci B (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
J Zhejiang Univ Sci B (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40436640
PMCID
PMC12119185
DOI
10.1631/jzus.b2300669
Citations
5

Abstract (original English)

Large bone defects in load-bearing bone can result from tumor resection, osteomyelitis, trauma, and other factors. Although bone has the intrinsic potential to self-repair and regenerate, the repair of large bone defects which exceed a certain critical size remains a substantial clinical challenge. Traditionally, repair methods involve using autologous or allogeneic bone tissue to replace the lost bone tissue at defect sites, and autogenous bone grafting remains the "gold standard" treatment. However, the application of traditional bone grafts is limited by drawbacks such as the quantity of extractable bone, donor-site morbidities, and the risk of rejection. In recent years, the clinical demand for alternatives to traditional bone grafts has promoted the development of novel bone-grafting substitutes. In addition to osteoconductivity and osteoinductivity, optimal mechanical properties have recently been the focus of efforts to improve the treatment success of novel bone-grafting alternatives in load-bearing bone defects, but most biomaterial synthetic scaffolds cannot provide sufficient mechanical strength. A fundamental challenge is to find an appropriate balance between mechanical and tissue-regeneration requirements. In this review, the use of traditional bone grafts in load-bearing bone defects, as well as their advantages and disadvantages, is summarized and reviewed. Furt

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Bone and BonesAnimalsHumansBone SubstitutesBone TransplantationBone RegenerationWeight-BearingTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.