Comparative Evaluation of Bone Repair with Four Different Bone Substitutes in Critical Size Defects

<div>Representative charts showing average values and standard deviation of newly formed bone area of the experimental groups (BIO, BFL, CLN, and LBP) at 14 and 40 days postoperatively with <span class="nowrap"><svg height="11.7782pt" id="M15" style="vertical-align:-3.42938pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.34882 50.7895 11.7782" width="50.7895pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M570 304C570 398 525 448 414 448C385 448 343 445 312 434L329 511L321 518C297 504 262 482 244 460L233 411C195 397 159 381 128 358L135 332C160 347 189 360 224 373L111 -147C97 -210 84 -218 17 -231L13 -257L254 -247L259 -218L233 -216C183 -212 177 -202 189 -142L218 -1C238 -10 266 -12 283 -12C351 3 429 48 483 105C543 168 570 242 570 304ZM482 289C482 161 380 33 304 33C278 33 248 51 233 69L303 396C326 400 352 403 369 403C428 403 482 380 482 289Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.342,0)"><path d="M512 -3V55L134 254V256L512 456V514L75 281V230L512 -3Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.605,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,28.845,0)"><path d="M113 -12C146 -12 170 11 170 46C170 78 146 103 114 103S58 78 58 46C58 11 82 -12 113 -12Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,31.809,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.049,0)"><path d="M241 635C89 635 35 457 35 312C35 153 89 -12 240 -12C390 -12 443 166 443 312C443 466 390 635 241 635ZM238 602C329 602 354 454 354 312C354 172 330 22 240 22C152 22 124 173 124 313S148 602 238 602Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,44.289,0)"><path d="M384 0V27C293 34 287 42 287 114V635C232 613 172 594 109 583V559L157 557C201 555 205 550 205 499V114C205 42 199 34 109 27V0H384Z"></path></g></svg>,</span> except for BFL and LBP at 14 days, which showed no difference (<span class="nowrap"><svg height="10.1524pt" id="M16" style="vertical-align:-0.04990005pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -10.1025 6.17869 10.1524" width="6.17869pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,0,-5.741)"><path d="M486 158C486 177 478 202 466 220C413 228 386 236 336 262C386 288 413 297 466 304C478 323 486 347 485 366C470 376 444 381 422 380C389 338 368 319 321 288C323 345 329 372 349 422C339 442 322 461 305 470C289 461 271 442 262 422C281 372 287 345 290 288C243 319 222 338 189 380C167 381 142 376 125 366C125 347 133 322 145 304C198 296 225 288 275 262C225 236 198 227 145 220C133 201 125 177 126 158C141 148 167 143 189 144C222 186 243 205 290 236C288 179 282 152 262 102C272 82 289 63 306 54C322 63 340 82 350 102C330 152 324 179 321 236C368 205 390 186 422 144C444 143 470 148 486 158Z"></path></g></svg>).</span></div>

International Journal of Biomaterials

fig4

Figure 4

Figure 4: Comparative Evaluation of Bone Repair with Four Different Bone Substitutes in Critical Size Defects 