Lost in translation: the lack of agreement between surgeons and scientists regarding biomaterials research and innovation for treating bone defects

• Published in: BMC medicine 2024-11, Vol.22 (1), p.517-16, Article 517
• Main Authors: Laubach, Markus, Whyte, Stephen, Chan, Ho Fai, Frankenbach-Désor, Tina, Mayer-Wagner, Susanne, Hildebrand, Frank, Holzapfel, Boris M, Kneser, Ulrich, Dulleck, Uwe, Hutmacher, Dietmar W
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 21st century; 3-D printers; 3D printing; Allografts; Autografts; Biocompatible Materials - therapeutic use; Biomaterials; Biomedical materials; Biomedical research; Bone biomaterials; Bone Diseases - surgery; Bone Diseases - therapy; Bone grafts; Bone growth; Bone substitutes; Bone Substitutes - therapeutic use; Bone Transplantation - methods; Bone-grafting; Calcium phosphates; Complications and side effects; Composite materials; Cross-Sectional Studies; Defects; Effectiveness; FDA approval; Fractures; Grafting; Grafts; Health aspects; Humans; Interdisciplinary communication; Male; Medical equipment; Methods; Orthopedics; Patients; Prospective Studies; Questionnaires; Regeneration; Regeneration (physiology); Regulatory approval; Reproducibility; Research Personnel; Scaffolds; Scientists; Skin & tissue grafts; Substitute bone; Surgeons; Survey study; Surveys; Technology assessment; Three dimensional printing; Tissue engineering; Tissue Engineering - methods; Transplants; Transplants & implants
• ISSN: 1741-7015; 1741-7015
• DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03734-z

With over 2 million grafts performed annually, bone ranks second only to blood in the frequency of transplants. This high demand is primarily driven by the persistent challenges posed by bone defects, particularly following trauma or surgical interventions such as tumour excision. The demand for effective and efficient treatments has increased exponentially in the twenty-first century. Limitations associated with autologous bone grafts drive exploration into replacements, including allografts, synthetic substitutes, and 3D-printed scaffolds. This research aimed to unravel disparities in the knowledge and evaluation of current and future bone defect treatments between surgeons and biomaterial scientists. A prospective cross-sectional survey, pre-registered with the OSF ( https://osf.io/y837m/?view_only=fab29e24df4f4adf897353ac70aa3361 ) and conducted online from October 2022 to March 2023, collected data on surgeons' views (n = 337) and scientists (n = 99) on bone defect treatments. Scientists were significantly more optimistic than surgeons regarding the future replacement of autologous bone grafts with synthetic or tissue-engineered substitutes (p