Biomaterials and Its Medical Applications

  • Saili Dharadhar
  • Anuradha MajumdarEmail author


The human body undergoes wear and tear with age, and it is subjected to various diseases and disorders throughout the lifespan. Sometimes, administration of medical agents does not suffice for complete recovery from the ailments. External agents or materials are required to support the normal functioning of the body. The materials that are engineered to interact with biological systems for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of diseases and ailments are known as biomaterials. Any resource to be engineered and used as a biomaterial must possess the qualities of biocompatibility, inertness, mechanical stability, and ease of fabrication. The site and application of the biomaterial may demand specific properties. Biomaterials for dental and orthopedic applications should possess substantial mechanical strength and prolonged rates of biodegradation, while those for visceral organ and dermal applications must be flexible with faster rates of degradation. Biomaterials may be of natural or synthetic origin. The chapter discusses various applications of biomaterials in the medical and pharmaceutical industry. It highlights the types of biomaterials and discusses their properties specific to each application.


Biomaterials Medical applications Biocompatibility Implants 





aluminum oxide


anaplastic large cell lymphoma


bare-metal stents


calcium phosphate


cardiovascular biomaterials


drug-eluting stent


extracellular matrix






intraocular lenses




nitrogenated stainless steel




polyethylene glycol


polyethylene terephthalate


polyglycolic acid


polylactic acid


poly (DL-lactide-co-glycolide)


PLGA immersed in fibronectin


poly-L-lactic acids


PLLA immersed in fibronectin

P (LL-co-CL)



polymethyl methacrylate






polyvinylidene fluoride


tendons and ligaments


total joint replacement


tumor necrosis factor




  1. 1.
    Tappa K, Jammalamadaka U (2018) Novel biomaterials used in medical 3D printing techniques. J Funct Biomater 9(1)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wong CS, Schaffner AD (2018) Breast, implants. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island (FL)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kang SH, Sutthiwanjampa C, Heo CY, Kim WS, Lee SH, Park H (2018) Current approaches including novel nano/microtechniques to reduce silicone implant-induced contracture with adverse immune responses. Int J Mol Sci 19(4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jaganathan SK, Supriyanto E, Murugesan S, Balaji A, Asokan MK (2014) Biomaterials in cardiovascular research: applications and clinical implications. Biomed Res Int 2014:459465PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ravi S, Chaikof EL (2010) Biomaterials for vascular tissue engineering. Regen Med 5(1):107–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kostrzewa B, Rybak Z (2013) History, present and future of biomaterials used for artificial heart valves. Polim Med 43(3):183–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zeng FG, Rebscher S, Harrison W, Sun X, Feng H (2008) Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 1:115–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harnack D, Winter C, Meissner W, Reum T, Kupsch A, Morgenstern R (2004) The effects of electrode material, charge density and stimulation duration on the safety of high-frequency stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in rats. J Neurosci Methods 138(1-2):207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mendes GC, Brandao TR, Silva CL (2007) Ethylene oxide sterilization of medical devices: a review. Am J Infect Control 35(9):574–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shannon RV (1992) A model of safe levels for electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 39(4):424–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ananth H, Kundapur V, Mohammed HS, Anand M, Amarnath GS, Mankar S (2015) A review on biomaterials in dental implantology. Int J Biomed Sci 11(3):113–120PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bhagwat R, Vaidhya IS (2013) Novel drug delivery systems: an overview. Int J Pharm Sci Res 4(3):970–982Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuo CK, Marturano JE, Tuan RS (2010) Novel strategies in tendon and ligament tissue engineering: advanced biomaterials and regeneration motifs. Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol 2:20PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cooper JA, Lu HH, Ko FK, Freeman JW, Laurencin CT (2005) Fiber-based tissue-engineered scaffold for ligament replacement: design considerations and in vitro evaluation. Biomaterials 26(13):1523–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roeder BA, Kokini K, Sturgis JE, Robinson JP, Voytik-Harbin SL (2002) Tensile mechanical properties of three-dimensional type I collagen extracellular matrices with varied microstructure. J Biomech Eng 124(2):214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Greenwald D, Shumway S, Albear P, Gottlieb L (1994) Mechanical comparison of 10 suture materials before and after in vivo incubation. J Surg Res 56(4):372–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Havelin LI, Espehaug B, Vollset SE, Engesaeter LB (1995) The effect of the type of cement on early revision of Charnley total hip prostheses. A review of eight thousand five hundred and seventy-nine primary arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77(10):1543–1550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eliaz N, Metoki N (2017) Calcium phosphate bioceramics: a review of their history, structure, properties, coating technologies and biomedical applications. Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 10:4Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Joint Replacement Surgery and You. In Arthritis MaSDo. April 2009.
  20. 20.
    Gibon E, Cordova LA, Lu L, Lin TH, Yao Z, Hamadouche M et al (2017b) The biological response to orthopedic implants for joint replacement. II: Polyethylene, ceramics, PMMA, and the foreign body reaction. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 105(6):1685–1691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gibon E, Amanatullah DF, Loi F, Pajarinen J, Nabeshima A, Yao Z et al (2017a) The biological response to orthopaedic implants for joint replacement: Part I: Metals. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 105(7):2162–2173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim JA, Ihn HJ, Park JY, Lim J, Hong JM, Kim SH et al (2015) Inhibitory effects of triptolide on titanium particle-induced osteolysis and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand-mediated osteoclast differentiation. Int Orthop 39(1):173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A, Flury R, Windler M, Koster G et al (2005) Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(1):28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gaudin R, Knipfer C, Henningsen A, Smeets R, Heiland M, Hadlock T (2016) Approaches to peripheral nerve repair: generations of biomaterial conduits yielding to replacing autologous nerve grafts in craniomaxillofacial surgery. Biomed Res Int 2016:3856262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Konofaos P, Ver Halen JP (2013) Nerve repair by means of tubulization: past, present, future. J Reconstr Microsurg 29(3):149–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bozkurt A, Lassner F, O’Dey D, Deumens R, Bocker A, Schwendt T et al (2012) The role of microstructured and interconnected pore channels in a collagen-based nerve guide on axonal regeneration in peripheral nerves. Biomaterials 33(5):1363–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang BG, Quigley AF, Myers DE, Wallace GG, Kapsa RM, Choong PF (2014) Recent advances in nerve tissue engineering. Int J Artif Organs 37(4):277–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nguyen J, Werner L (1995) Intraocular lenses for cataract surgery. In: Kolb H, Fernandez E, Nelson R (eds) Webvision: the organization of the retina and visual system. University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City (UT). Copyright: (c) 2018 WebvisionGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Werner L (2008) Biocompatibility of intraocular lens materials. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19(1):41–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Maddula S, Werner L, Ness PJ, Davis D, Zaugg B, Stringham J et al (2011) Pathology of 157 human cadaver eyes with round-edged or modern square-edged silicone intraocular lenses: analyses of capsule bag opacification. J Cataract Refract Surg 37(4):740–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vig K, Chaudhari A, Tripathi S, Dixit S, Sahu R, Pillai S et al (2017) Advances in skin regeneration using tissue engineering. Int J Mol Sci 18(4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gierek M, Kusnierz K, Lampe P, Ochala G, Kurek J, Hekner B et al (2018) Absorbable sutures in general surgery – review, available materials, and optimum choices. Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny 90(2):34–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Todros S, Pavan PG, Natali AN (2015) Biomechanical properties of synthetic surgical meshes for pelvic prolapse repair. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 55:271–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ding J, Deng M, Song XC, Chen C, Lai KL, Wang GS et al (2016) Nanofibrous biomimetic mesh can be used for pelvic reconstructive surgery: a randomized study. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 61:26–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.HyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Pharmacology and ToxicologyBombay College of PharmacyMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations