Table 7: Summary of the in vivo preclinical studies reviewed in which hybrid scaffolds were tested.

Author, yearCeramic materialPolymeric materialAnimal choiceAnatomical choiceLength of studyTime pointsSample sizeDefect sizeScaffold sizeControl

Cao and Kuboyama, 2010 [46]β-TCPPGASprague-Dawley ratsFemur; Medial epicondyle12 weeks0, 14, 30, and 90 days5/time points/group3 mm diameter; 2 mm depthN/A(+) HAp
(−) no implant

Chu et al., 2007 [72]TCPPPFLong Evans ratsFemur15 weeks6 and 15 weeks4 or 7/time point/group5 mmOD: 4 mm—ID: 2 mm; Height 5 mmNo BMP

Jegoux et al., 2008 [73]BCaPCollagenNew Zealand white rabbit and beagle dogsFemur18 weeks18 weeks6 rabbits, 6 dogs20 mm  mm

Guda et al., 2011 [74]HApNew Zealand white rabbitRadial diaphysis8 weeks4 and 8 weeks12/time point/group10 mm(+) autograft
(−) no implant

Ignatius et al., 2001 [75]β-TCPPLAMerino sheepTibia8 weeks6, 12, and 24 months6/time point/groupN/A24 mm length, 14 mm wide, 6 mm thick(+) TCP
(−) autograft

Jayabalan et al., 2010 [76]HApHT-PPFhmRabbitFemur48 weeks12, 24, and 48 weeks2/time point4 mm diameter; 2 mm depthN/A(−) no implant

Lickorish et al., 2007 [77]TTCP and DCPAPLGAWistar ratsFemur2 weeks2 weeksN/A2.3 mm diameter2 mm diameterPLGA

Rai et al., 2010 [78]TCPPCLCBH/Rnu ratsFemur3 weeks3 weeks6/time point8 mm8 mm high, 4 mm diameter(−) non-seeded

Xu et al., 2011 [25]BioglassCollagen-phosphatidylserineSprague-Dawley ratsFemur6 weeks3 day, 3 and 6 weeks3/time point/group3.5 mm diameter;
4.5 mm diameter
N/ANo phosphatidylserine


Author, yearType of testingType of histologyHistological parameters analyzedμ-CT parameters analyzedMechanical testing

Cao and Kuboyama, 2010 [46]μ-CT, bone mineral density (new bone quantity), histology, and biodegradationDecalcified histologyArea of material in defect, new bone volume/total volume percent material biodegradationBone reformationNo

Chu et al., 2007 [72]Radiograph, μ-CT, and histologyMMC histologyNew bone formationCallus and scaffold volumetric bone mineral densityFour-point bending

Jegoux et al., 2008 [73]Polarized Light; μ-CT, SEMGlycol methacrylateUsed thick histology sections for observation under polerBioceramic, newly formed bone at the center, and superior and inferior quarter of the implantNo

Guda et al., 2011 [74]Radiograph, μ-CT, histologyMMC histologyMineralized bone, fibrous tissueBone regeneration patterns, bone density, bone growth profiles, and overall bone volumeFour-point bending

Ignatius et al., 2001 [75]Mechanical, histologyUndecalcified histologyNew bone formation, new soft tissue formation, remaining implant componentsNoCompression of  mm cubes

Jayabalan et al., 2010 [76]HistologyResin histologyForeign body giant cell, bone growthNoNo

Lickorish et al., 2007 [77]HistologyDecalcified histologyFibrous tissue formation, bone ingrowth, foreign body reactionNoNo

Rai et al., 2010 [78]Radiograph, μ-CT, histologyDecalcified histologyPresence of fibroblasts, chondrocytes, woven boneNew bone formationNo

Xu et al., 2011 [25]Histology; radiographyDecalcified histologyInflammatory reaction, new bone formation, scaffold resorptionNoNo