Editorial Feature

Classifications and Behavior of Different Types of Biomaterials

Artificial materials and devices have been developed to a point now where they can replace various components of the human body. These materials are capable of being in contact with bodily fluids and tissues for prolonged periods of time, whilst eliciting few if any adverse reactions.

Image Credit: Sergei Anishchenko/Shutterstock.com

 

Topics Covered

Background

Biomaterials

Historical Development of Biomaterials

Design Factors for Biomaterials

Implant Materials

Biomaterials Classifications

Bioinert Biomaterials

Bioactive Biomaterials

Bioresorbable Biomaterials

Background

Trauma, degeneration and diseases often make surgical repair or replacement necessary. When a person has a joint pain the main concern is the relief of pain and return to a healthy and functional life style. This usually requires replacement of skeletal parts that include knees, hips, finger joints, elbows, vertebrae, teeth, and repair of the mandible. The worldwide biomaterials market is valued at close to $24,000M. Orthopaedic and dental applications represent approximately 55% of the total biomaterials market. Orthopaedics products worldwide exceeded $13 billion in 2000, an increase of 12 percent over 1999 revenues. Expansion in these areas is expected to continue due to number of factors, including the ageing population, an increasing preference by younger to middle aged candidates to undertake surgery, improvements in the technology and life style, a better understanding of body functionality, improved aesthetics and need for better function.

What are Biomaterials?

Biomaterial by definition is “a non-drug substance suitable for inclusion in systems which augment or replace the function of bodily tissues or organs”. From as early as a century ago artificial materials and devices have been developed to a point where they can replace various components of the human body. These materials are capable of being in contact with bodily fluids and tissues for prolonged periods of time, whilst eliciting little if any adverse reactions.

Historical Development of Biomaterials

Some of the earliest biomaterial applications were as far back as ancient Phoenicia where loose teeth were bound together with gold wires for tying artificial ones to neighbouring teeth. In the early 1900’s bone plates were successfully implemented to stabilise bone fractures and to accelerate their healing. While by the time of the 1950’s to 60’s, blood vessel replacement were in clinical trials and artificial heart valves and hip joints were in development.

Design Factors for Biomaterials

Even in the preliminary stages of this field, surgeons and engineers identified materials and design problems that resulted in premature loss of implant function through mechanical failure, corrosion or inadequate biocompatibility of the component. Key factors in a biomaterial usage are its biocompatibility, biofunctionality, and availability to a lesser extent. Ceramics are ideal candidates with respect to all the above functions, except for their brittle behaviour.

Implant Materials

It has been accepted that no foreign material placed within a living body is completely compatible. The only substances that conform completely are those manufactured by the body itself (autogenous) and any other substance that is recognized as foreign, initiates some type of reaction (host-tissue response). The four types of responses, which allow different means of achieving attachment of implants to the muscular skeletal system, are given in Figure 1.

AZoM - Metals, Ceramics, Polymer and Composites : Biomaterials – Diagram showing the different  Behaviour modes of the  Different Types of Biomaterials

Figure 1. Classification of biomaterials according to their bioactivity (a) bioinert alumina dental implant, (b) bioactive hydroxyapatite [Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2] coating on a metallic dental implant, (c) surface active bioglass and (d) bioresorbable tricalcium phosphate ([Ca3(PO4)2] impant.

Biomaterials Classifications

When a synthetic material is placed within the human body, tissue reacts towards the implant in a variety of ways depending on the material type. The mechanism of tissue interaction (if any) depends on the tissue response to the implant surface. In general, there are three terms in which a biomaterial may be described in or classified into representing the tissues responses. These are bioinert, bioresorbable, and bioactive, which are well covered in range of excellent review papers.

Bioinert Biomaterials

The term bioinert refers to any material that once placed in the human body has minimal interaction with its surrounding tissue, examples of these are stainless steel, titanium, alumina, partially stabilised zirconia, and ultra high molecular weight polyethylene. Generally a fibrous capsule might form around bioinert implants hence its biofunctionality relies on tissue integration through the implant (Figure 1a).

Bioactive Biomaterials

Bioactive refers to a material, which upon being placed within the human body interacts with the surrounding bone and in some cases, even soft tissue. This occurs through a time – dependent kinetic modification of the surface, triggered by their implantation within the living bone. An ion – exchange reaction between the bioactive implant and surrounding body fluids – results in the formation of a biologically active carbonate apatite (CHAp) layer on the implant that is chemically and crystallographically equivalent to the mineral phase in bone. Prime examples of these materials are synthetic hydroxyapatite [Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2], glass ceramic A-W and bioglass® (Figure 1b and c)).

Bioresorbable Biomaterials

Bioresorbable refers to a material that upon placement within the human body starts to dissolve (resorbed) and slowly replaced by advancing tissue (such as bone). Common examples of bioresorbable materials are tricalcium phosphate [Ca3(PO4)2] and polylactic–polyglycolic acid copolymers. Calcium oxide, calcium carbonate and gypsum are other common materials that have been utilised during the last three decades (Figure 1d).

A complete set of references can be found by referring to the original paper.

 

Primary author: G. Heness and B. Ben-Nissan

Source: Abstracted from “Innovative Bioceramics” in Materials Forum, Vol. 27, 2004.

 

For more information on this source please visit The Institute of Materials Engineering Australasia.

 

Tell Us What You Think

Do you have a review, update or anything you would like to add to this article?

Leave your feedback
Your comment type
Submit
Azthena logo

AZoM.com powered by Azthena AI

Your AI Assistant finding answers from trusted AZoM content

Azthena logo with the word Azthena

Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant

Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from AZoNetwork.com.

A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.

  • Use of “Azthena” is subject to the terms and conditions of use as set out by OpenAI.
  • Content provided on any AZoNetwork sites are subject to the site Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
  • Large Language Models can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.

Great. Ask your question.

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.