Retraction: Enhanced bone defect repairing effects in glucocorticoid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head using a porous nano-lithium-hydroxyapatite/gelatin microsphere/erythropoietin composite scaffold

Abstract

Retraction of ‘Enhanced bone defect repairing effects in glucocorticoid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head using a porous nano-lithium-hydroxyapatite/gelatin microsphere/erythropoietin composite scaffold’ by Donghai Li et al., Biomater. Sci., 2018, 6, 519–537, https://doi.org/10.1039/C7BM00975E.

---

The authors found that there were a number of errors in figures in the article and requested a correction. Due to concerns with the reliability of the data and in order to maintain the accuracy of the scientific record, the authors and the editor decided to retract the article after consultation.

A number of panels in Fig. 5, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 18 contain sections of duplicated images, including:

In Fig. 5, a section of the ‘rhEPO + AKTi/Calcium node’ panel is duplicated in the ‘Blank control/Calcium node’ panel.

In Fig. 13a, a section of the HE ‘Blank control/8 week’ panel is duplicated in the HE ‘Blank control/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 13b, a section of the Masson ‘Autogenous bone/8 week’ panel is duplicated in the Masson ‘Autogenous bone/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 15a, a section of the ALP ‘nHA/12 week’ panel is duplicated in the ALP ‘Li-nHA/12 week’ panel.

In Fig 16b, a section of the CD31 ‘Autogenous bone/12 week’ panel is duplicated in the CD31 ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 16b, a section of the CD31 ‘nHA/12 week’ panel is duplicated in the CD31 ‘Li-nHA/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 17, a section of the PI3K ‘nHA/6 week’ panel is duplicated in the AKT ‘Li-nHA/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 17, a section of the PI3K ‘Li-nHA/6 week’ panel is duplicated in the AKT ‘Li-nHA/6 week’ panel.

In Fig. 17, a section of the PI3K ‘Blank control/6 week’ panel is duplicated in the AKT ‘Blank control/6 week’ panel.

In Fig. 17, different sections of the PI3K ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/12 week’ panel are duplicated in the AKT ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/6 week’ and AKT ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/12 week’ panels. Furthermore, another section of the AKT ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/6 week’ panel is also duplicated in the PI3K ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/6 week’ panel.

In Fig. 17, a section of the PI3K ‘Autogenous bone/12 week’ panel is duplicated in the AKT ‘Autogenous bone/12 week’ panel.

A section of the PI3K ‘nHA/12 week’ panel in Fig. 17 is duplicated in the AKT ‘nHA/6 week’ panel of Fig. 17 and in the β-catenin ‘nHA/12 week’ panel of Fig. 18.

In Fig. 18, a section of the GSK-3β ‘nHA/12 week’ panel is duplicated in the β-catenin ‘Li-nHA/GMs/rhEPO/12 week’ panel.

In Fig. 18, a section of the β-catenin ‘Li-nHA/6 week’ panel is duplicated in the β-catenin ‘Li-nHA/12 week’ panel.

The authors have also informed the editor that the image used for the HE ‘Li-nHA/8 week’ panel in Fig. 13a is incorrect.

In addition, there are discrepancies in the backgrounds of many of the western blot panels, including the PPAR-γ panel in Fig. 4, the GSK-3β panel in Fig. 9 and the PI3K panel in Fig. 19B. The authors are unable to provide verifiable raw data that could be used to validate the published western blot data.

Signed: Donghai Li, Xiaowei Xie, Zhouyuan Yang, Changde Wang, Zhun Wei and Pengde Kang

Date: 24^th March 2023

Retraction endorsed by Maria Southall, Executive Editor, Biomaterials Science

---