The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Testing the Critical Size in Calvarial Bone Defects: Revisiting the Concept of a Critical-Size Defect
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: There is a clinical need for bone replacement strategies because of the shortfalls endemic to autologous bone grafting, especially in the pediatric patient population. For the past 25 years, the animal model that has been used to test bone replacement strategies has been the calvarial critical-size defect, based on the initial size of the bone defect. This study was undertaken to test the concept of the critical size in several different models. A review of the theoretical and scientific bases for the critical-size defect was also undertaken. METHODS: Two different rodent species (including 28 adult mice and six adult rats) were used to assess bone healing by means of two-dimensional radiographic analysis after creating small bone defects using different surgical techniques. RESULTS: Defects in mice that were smaller than critical-size defects (1.8-mm diameter) were shown to heal a maximum of 50 percent 1 year postoperatively. Small defects (2.3-mm diameter) in the rat skull showed approximately 35 percent healing after 6 weeks. Neither the choice of rodent species nor the maintenance of the dura mater significantly affected calvarial bone healing. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that calvarial bone healing is not well described and much more data need to be collected. Also, after a review of the existing literature and a critique of the clinical applicability of the model, it is suggested that the use of the term "critical-size defect" be discontinued.
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
Cited by
Evaluation of bone regeneration using the rat critical size calvarial defect
Spicer, P. P., Kretlow, J. D., Young, S., Jansen, J. A., Kasper, F. K., & Mikos, A. G. (2012) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2012.113 · Cited by 664
Mediero, A., Wilder, T., Perez‐Aso, M., & Cronstein, B. N. (2015) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.14-265066 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooper, G. M., Mooney, M. P., Gosain, A. K., Campbell, P. G., Losee, J. E., & Huard, J.
- Venue
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
- Published
- 2010-06
- Volume
- 125
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1685-1692
- ISSN
- 0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1998588509
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Testing the Critical Size in Calvarial Bone Defects: Revisiting the Concept of a Critical-Size Defect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/prs.0b013e3181cb63a3
- The paper
- Cooper, G. M., Mooney, M. P., Gosain, A. K., Campbell, P. G., Losee, J. E., & Huard, J. (2010). Testing the Critical Size in Calvarial Bone Defects: Revisiting the Concept of a Critical-Size Defect. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0b013e3181cb63a3
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.