Erratum to: Clinical trial and in-vitro study comparing the efficacy of treating bony lesions with allografts versus synthetic or highly-processed xenogeneic bone grafts

Abstract

Erratum After publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in the ‘Methods’ section. Within the ‘Patients’ sub-section, the first item in the list of synthetic or highly processed xenogeneic bone substitutes (SBS) should have been given as Orthoss®, rather than BioOss®. The sentence should therefore have read as follows: “The following SBS were used: Orthoss® (Geistlich, Wolhusen, Switzerland) in 41.4 %, and at clearly lower percentages, respectively: Norian SRS® (Synthes) (8.6 %), Chronos® (Synthes) (1.7 %), Atlantik® (Argomedical) (2.6 %), Alaska® (Argomedical) (0.9 %), Endobone® (Biomet) (4.3 %), Pyrost® (Stryker) (0.9 %), Nanostim® (Medtronic) (37.1 %), Actifuse® (Baxter) (0.9 %), Tutobone® (Novomedics) (0.9 %) and PerOssal® (Botiss) (0.9 %).”

DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-0976-0

Extracted Key Phrases

Cite this paper

@inproceedings{Kubosch2016ErratumTC, title={Erratum to: Clinical trial and in-vitro study comparing the efficacy of treating bony lesions with allografts versus synthetic or highly-processed xenogeneic bone grafts}, author={Eva Johanna Kubosch and Anke Bernstein and Laura Wolf and Tobias Fretwurst and Katja Nelson and Hagen Schmal}, booktitle={BMC musculoskeletal disorders}, year={2016} }