Evidence Hub

Biodegradable metals for bone defect repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on animal studies

Jia-Zhen Zhang, Yanbiao Jiang, Zhizhong Shang, Bing Zhao, Mingyue Jiao, Wenbo Liu, Maobo Cheng, Bao Zhai et al.

Bioactive Materials, 2021

102 citations

Abstract

Biodegradable metals are promising candidates for bone defect repair. With an evidence-based approach, this study investigated and analyzed the performance and degradation properties of biodegradable metals in animal models for bone defect repair to explore their potential clinical translation. Animal studies on bone defect repair with biodegradable metals in comparison with other traditional biomaterials were reviewed. Data was carefully collected after identification of population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design (PICOS), and following the inclusion criteria of biodegradable metals in animal studies. 30 publications on pure Mg, Mg alloys, pure Zn and Zn alloys were finally included after extraction from a collected database of 2543 publications. A qualitative systematic review and a quantitative meta-analysis were performed. Given the heterogeneity in animal model, anatomical site and critical size defect (CSD), biodegradable metals exhibited mixed effects on bone defect repair and degradation in animal studies in comparison with traditional non-degradable metals, biodegradable polymers, bioceramics, and autogenous bone grafts. The results indicated that there were limitations in the experimental design of the included studies, and quality of the evidence presented by the studies was very low. To enhance clinical translation of biodegradable metals, evidence-based research with data validity is needed. Future studies should adopt standardized…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free