Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Spine fusion is considered to be the gold standard for the treatment of most degenerative and traumatic spinal conditions. Bone graft is still the best choice to achieve fusion and currently autologous and allograft bone are the main sources for bone grafting procedures. Autologous bone has by far the most osteogenic potential, but it is limited and it can lead to a donor site pain condition. Allograft bone is an important source when structural or large volumes of grafts are required. Concerns related to the use of both autografts and allografts has led to the search for alternatives, but synthetic bone graft substitutes as yet offer only a partial solution to the management of localized bone loss. They possess some of the desired mechanical qualities of bone as well as osteointegrative/conductive properties, but are largely reliant on viable periosteum/bone for their success. The advent of composite synthetic bone graft substitutes and biologically active factors is moving closer to the goal of obtaining a synthetic bone graft substitute that mimics the native bone in both mechanical and osteogenic properties.
Archivio di Ortopedia e Reumatologia – Springer Journals
Published: Dec 30, 2012
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.