Bone Graft Substitutes: Current Concepts and Future Expectations

J Hand Surg Am. 2019 Jun;44(6):497-505.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.10.032. Epub 2019 Jan 28.

Abstract

Owing to its osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties and the presence of osteogenic cells, freshly harvested autologous bone graft is the gold standard for skeletal reconstruction where there is inadequate native bone. Whereas these characteristics are difficult to replicate, engineered, commercially available bone graft substitutes aim to achieve a comparable osseoregenerative profile. This work furnishes the reader with an understanding of the predominant classes of bone graft substitutes available for reconstruction of upper extremity bone defects following trauma or oncological surgery. We review bone graft substitutes with respect to their mechanisms of action, their advantages and disadvantages, and their indications and contraindications. We provide examples of bone graft substitutes in clinical use and outline comparative costs. We also describe the future directions for this specific aspect of reconstructive surgery with a focus on the role of bioactive glass.

Keywords: Bone graft substitute; allograft; autograft.

Publication types

  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Bone Morphogenetic Proteins
  • Bone Substitutes*
  • Calcium Phosphates
  • Calcium Sulfate
  • Durapatite
  • Glass
  • Humans
  • Polymethyl Methacrylate
  • Upper Extremity / surgery

Substances

  • 13-93 bioactive glass
  • Bone Morphogenetic Proteins
  • Bone Substitutes
  • Calcium Phosphates
  • Polymethyl Methacrylate
  • Durapatite
  • tricalcium phosphate
  • Calcium Sulfate