The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Potential of ceramic materials as permanently implantable skeletal prostheses
Abstract
The feasibility of the use of porous ceramic materials in the permanent repair of skeletal defects was studied from the standpoint of physiological compatibility and in growth of natural bone. High‐fired calcium aluminate samples in the form of quarter‐inch diameter cylindrical pellets containing interconnecting porous networks were implanted in vivo into canine femurs for 4‐, 11‐, and 22‐week periods. The implants had 65% porosity with pore size falling within one of five distinct ranges from less than 45 μ to about 200 μ in diameter. Thin sections were prepared by grinding (poly) methyl methacrylate‐mounted cross sections of the femurs containing the implanted ceramic samples and adjacent soft tissues. Tissue‐prosthetic compatibility was determined using standard histological thin section procedures, electron microbeam probe examinations, autoradiographic techniques, microfadiographic techniques, microchemistry techniques, and ultra‐violet fluorescent techniques. Optical microscopic evaluations of each section showed the ceramic samples to be bound lightly by natural bone and gave no detectable signs of tissue incompatibility. Minimum pore size for significant ingrowth of natural bone was indicated to be between 75 and 100 μ.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantitative Microradiographic Studies of Normal and Osteoporotic Bone
JOWSEY, J., KELLY, P. J., RIGGS, B. L., BIANCO, A. J., SCHOLZ, D. A., & GERSHON-COHEN, J. (1965) · The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery · doi:10.2106/00004623-196547040-00014 · Cited by 362
Cited by
Tissue-engineered bone regeneration
Petite, H., Viateau, V., Bensaïd, W., Meunier, A., de Pollak, C., Bourguignon, M., Oudina, K., Sedel, L., & Guillemin, G. (2000) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/79449 · Cited by 1,475
Recent advances in biomaterials for 3D scaffolds: A review
Nikolova, M. P., & Chavali, M. S. (2019) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2019.10.005 · Cited by 907
Osteoinduction of bone grafting materials for bone repair and regeneration
García-Gareta, E., Coathup, M. J., & Blunn, G. W. (2015) · Bone · doi:10.1016/j.bone.2015.07.007 · Cited by 649
Hollander, D. A., von Walter, M., Wirtz, T., Sellei, R., Schmidt-Rohlfing, B., Paar, O., & Erli, H.-J. (2006) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.07.041 · Cited by 482
Vascularized Bone Tissue Engineering: Approaches for Potential Improvement
Nguyen, L. H., Annabi, N., Nikkhah, M., Bae, H., Binan, L., Park, S., Kang, Y., Yang, Y., & Khademhosseini, A. (2012) · Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews · doi:10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0012 · Cited by 313
Metadata
- Authors
- Hulbert, S. F., Young, F. A., Mathews, R. S., Klawitter, J. J., Talbert, C. D., & Stelling, F. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1970-09
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 433-456
- ISSN
- 0021-9304 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-4636
- OpenAlex
- W2113613856
- Cited by
- 1,019
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Potential of ceramic materials as permanently implantable skeletal prostheses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jbm.820040309
- The paper
- Hulbert, S. F., Young, F. A., Mathews, R. S., Klawitter, J. J., Talbert, C. D., & Stelling, F. H. (1970). Potential of ceramic materials as permanently implantable skeletal prostheses. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820040309
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.