Absorbable metals have been proposed as potential materials for hard tissue scaffolding to offer both high mechanical support and bioabsorbability. Over the past 5 years, many works sought evidence of the interesting mechanical property which mimics to that of human bone with tailored corrosion behaviour. The emerging additive manufacturing (AM) technology helps to optimise the design and production of topological porous absorbable metals suited for bone scaffolds. Since the studies on the porous absorbable metals are on the rise, we provide a current state-of-the-art of corrosion performances for porous Mg-based and Fe-based scaffolds including recent developments and the remaining challenges. A detailed discussion on the impacts of advanced AM and recently developed dynamic-flow corrosion on their in vitro corrosion, mechanical strengths and biocompatibility are also provided. This review also analyses the suitability of both metals to be used for bone substitute materials.
GordeladzeJOHaugenHJLyngstadaasSP.Bone tissue engineering: state of the art, challenges, and prospects. In: HasanA, editor. Tissue engineering for artificial organs. Weinheim, Germany : Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA; 2017. p. 525–551.
2.
YusopAHBakirAAShaharomNA. Porous biodegradable metals for hard tissue scaffolds: a review. Int J Biomater. 2012; 2012: 641430.
3.
GorejováRHaverováLOriňakováR. Recent advancements in Fe-based biodegradable materials for bone repair. J Mater Sci. 2019; 54 (3): 1913–1947.
4.
HermawanH.Updates on the research and development of absorbable metals for biomedical applications. Prog Biomater. 2018;7:93-110.
5.
WangXXuSZhouS. Topological design and additive manufacturing of porous metals for bone scaffolds and orthopaedic implants: a review. Biomaterials. 2016; 83: 127–141.
6.
ZhengYFGuXNWitteF.Biodegradable metals. Mater Sci Eng R: Rep. 2014; 77: 1–34.
7.
VenezuelaJDarguschMS.The influence of alloying and fabrication techniques on the mechanical properties, biodegradability and biocompatibility of zinc: a comprehensive review. Acta Biomater. 2019; 87: 1–40.
8.
StaigerMPPietakAMHuadmaiJ. Magnesium and its alloys as orthopedic biomaterials: a review. Biomaterials. 2006; 27 (9): 1728–1734.
9.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeD. Porous magnesium-based scaffolds for tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017; 71: 1253–1266.
10.
YuWZhaoHDingZ. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of MgF2 coated AZ31 magnesium alloy porous scaffolds for bone regeneration. Colloids Surf B. 2017; 149: 330–340.
11.
MutluI.Production and characterization of highly porous biodegradable Mg alloy scaffolds containing Ca, Zn and Co. Biomed Mater Eng. 2017; 29 (1): 119–135.
12.
LiuWWangJJiangG. The improvement of corrosion resistance, biocompatibility and osteogenesis of the novel porous Mg-Nd-Zn alloy. J Mater Chem B. 2017; 5 (36): 7661–7674.
13.
HongKParkHKimY. Mechanical and biocorrosive properties of magnesium-aluminum alloy scaffold for biomedical applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019; 98: 213–224.
14.
DhyahAApriliaEFranciskaPL. Microstructure and corrosion study of porous Mg–Zn–Ca alloy in simulated body fluid. Mater Res Express. 2017; 4 (3): 034006.
15.
JiaGChenCZhangJ. In vitro degradation behavior of Mg scaffolds with three-dimensional interconnected porous structures for bone tissue engineering. Corros Sci. 2018;144:301-312.
16.
Md SaadAPSyahromA.Study of dynamic degradation behaviour of porous magnesium under physiological environment of human cancellous bone. Corros Sci. 2018; 131: 45–56.
17.
SeyedraoufiZSMirdamadiS.Microstructure, in vitro corrosion and mechanical properties of porous magnesium-zinc nanocomposite scaffolds. Int J Res Mater Sci. 2015; 1 (1): 49–58.
18.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeD. In vitro analysis of Mg scaffolds coated with polymer/hydrogel/ceramic composite layers. Surf Coat Technol. 2016; 301: 126–132.
19.
KangM-HLeeHJangT-S. Biomimetic porous Mg with tunable mechanical properties and biodegradation rates for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2019; 84: 453–467.
20.
Katarivas LevyGVenturaYGoldmanJ. Cytotoxic characteristics of biodegradable EW10X04 Mg alloy after Nd coating and subsequent heat treatment. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2016; 62: 752–761.
21.
SongG.Control of biodegradation of biocompatable magnesium alloys. Corros Sci. 2007; 49 (4): 1696–1701.
22.
SeitzJ-MEiflerRBachF-W. Magnesium degradation products: effects on tissue and human metabolism. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014; 102 (10): 3744–3753.
23.
NovianaDParamithaDUlumMF. The effect of hydrogen gas evolution of magnesium implant on the postimplantation mortality of rats. J Orthop Translat. 2016; 5: 9–15.
24.
BiezmaMV.The role of hydrogen in microbiologically influenced corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2001; 26 (5): 515–520.
25.
MaiEDLiuH.Investigation on magnesium degradation under flow versus static conditions using a novel impedance-driven flow apparatus. Prog Nat Sci Mater Int. 2014; 24 (5): 554–560.
26.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeD. Development and degradation behavior of magnesium scaffolds coated with polycaprolactone for bone tissue engineering. Mater Lett. 2014; 132 (Supplement C): 106–110.
KoppADerraTMütherM. Influence of design and postprocessing parameters on the degradation behavior and mechanical properties of additively manufactured magnesium scaffolds. Acta Biomater. 2019; 98: 23–35.
30.
WitteFJauerLMeinersW. Open-porous biodegradable magnesium scaffolds produced by selective laser melting for individualized bone replacement. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2016; Biotechnol. Conference Abstract: 10th World Biomaterials Congress.
31.
AghionEPerezY.Effects of porosity on corrosion resistance of Mg alloy foam produced by powder metallurgy technology. Mater Charact. 2014; 96: 78–83.
32.
Md. SaadAPJasmawatiNHarunMN. Dynamic degradation of porous magnesium under a simulated environment of human cancellous bone. Corros Sci. 2016; 112: 495–506.
33.
ChengM-QWahafuTJiangG-F. A novel open-porous magnesium scaffold with controllable microstructures and properties for bone regeneration. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 24134.
34.
Md SaadAPAbdul RahimRAHarunMN. The influence of flow rates on the dynamic degradation behaviour of porous magnesium under a simulated environment of human cancellous bone. Mater Des. 2017; 122: 268–279.
35.
SeyedraoufiZSMirdamadiS.Produce of biodegradable porous Mg-Zn scaffold via powder metallurgy and coated with nano HAP synthesized by electrodeposition process. J Environ Friendly Mater. 2017; 1 (1): 40–45.
36.
MutluI.Production and fluoride treatment of Mg-Ca-Zn-Co alloy foam for tissue engineering applications. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China. 2018; 28 (1): 114–124.
37.
Bakhsheshi-RadHRHamzahEStaigerMP. Drug release, cytocompatibility, bioactivity, and antibacterial activity of doxycycline loaded Mg-Ca-TiO2 composite scaffold. Mater Des. 2018; 139: 212–221.
38.
Md SaadAPPrakosoATSulongMA. Impacts of dynamic degradation on the morphological and mechanical characterisation of porous magnesium scaffold. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2019; 18 (3): 797–811.
39.
GhasaliEBordbar-KhiabaniAAlizadehM. Corrosion behavior and in-vitro bioactivity of porous Mg/Al2O3 and Mg/Si3N4 metal matrix composites fabricated using microwave sintering process. Mater Chem Phys. 2019; 225: 331–339.
40.
SinghSVashisthPShrivastavA. Synthesis and characterization of a novel open cellular Mg-based scaffold for tissue engineering application. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019; 94: 54–62.
41.
ToghyaniSKhodaeiMRazaviM.Magnesium scaffolds with two novel biomimetic designs and MgF2 coating for bone tissue engineering. Surf Coat Technol. 2020; 395: 125929.
42.
YanYKangYLiD. Microstructure, mechanical properties and corrosion behavior of porous Mg-6 wt.% Zn scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Mater Eng Perform. 2018; 27 (3): 970–984.
PeusterMWohlseinPBrügmannM. A novel approach to temporary stenting: degradable cardiovascular stents produced from corrodible metal-results 6-18 months after implantation into New Zealand white rabbits. Heart. 2001; 86 (5): 563–569.
45.
TrumboPSchlickerSYatesAA. Dietary reference intakes for energy, carbohydrate, fiber, fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, protein and amino acids. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002; 102 (11): 1621–1630.
46.
SchinhammerMGerberIHänziAC. On the cytocompatibility of biodegradable Fe-based alloys. Mater Sci Eng C. 2013; 33 (2): 782–789.
47.
YusopAHSarianMNJanuddiFS. Structure, degradation, drug release and mechanical properties relationships of iron-based drug eluting scaffolds: the effects of PLGA. Mater Des. 2018; 160: 203–217.
48.
SharmaPJainKGPandeyPM. In vitro degradation behaviour, cytocompatibility and hemocompatibility of topologically ordered porous iron scaffold prepared using 3D printing and pressureless microwave sintering. Mater Sci Eng C. 2020; 106: 110247.
49.
KrausTMosznerFFischerauerS. Biodegradable Fe-based alloys for use in osteosynthesis: outcome of an in vivo study after 52 weeks. Acta Biomater. 2014; 10 (7): 3346–3353.
50.
HeidenMWalkerE, StanciuL.Magnesium, iron and zinc alloys, the trifecta of bioresorbable orthopaedic and vascular implantation—a review. J Biotechnol Biomater. 2015; 5:2–9.
51.
HrubovčákováMKupkováMDžuponM.Fe and Fe-P foam for biodegradable bone replacement material: morphology, corrosion behaviour, and mechanical properties. Adv Mater Sci Eng. 2016: Article ID 6257368.
52.
FengYPGaztelumendiNFornellJ. Mechanical properties, corrosion performance and cell viability studies on newly developed porous Fe-Mn-Si-Pd alloys. J Alloys Compd. 2017; 724: 1046–1056.
53.
HongDChouD-TVelikokhatnyiOI. Binder-jetting 3D printing and alloy development of new biodegradable Fe-Mn-Ca/Mg alloys. Acta Biomater. 2016; 45: 375–386.
54.
HrubovčákováMKupkováMDžuponM. Biodegradable polylactic acid and polylactic acid/hydroxyapatite coated iron foams for bone replacement materials. Int J Electrochem Sci. 2017; 12: 11122–11136.
55.
OriňakováRGorejováRMackoJ. Evaluation of in vitro biocompatibility of open cell iron structures with PEG coating. Appl Surf Sci. 2019; 475: 515–518.
56.
YusopADaudNHermawanH.Development of PLGA-infiltrated porous iron for temporary medical implants. Eur Cells Mater. 2013; 26: 9.
57.
YusopAHHermawanH.Synthesis and development of polymers-infiltrated porous iron for temporary medical implants: a preliminary result. Adv Mat Res. 2013; 686: 331–335.
58.
HuangSMNaumanEAStanciuLA.Investigation of porosity on mechanical properties, degradation and in-vitro cytotoxicity limit of Fe30Mn using space holder technique. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2019; 99: 1048–1057.
SharmaPPandeyPM.Morphological and mechanical characterization of topologically ordered open cell porous iron foam fabricated using 3D printing and pressureless microwave sintering. Mater Des. 2018; 160: 442–454.
61.
SharmaPPandeyPM.A novel manufacturing route for the fabrication of topologically-ordered open-cell porous iron scaffold. Mater Lett. 2018; 222: 160–163.
ObayiCSToloueiRMostavanA. Effect of grain sizes on mechanical properties and biodegradation behavior of pure iron for cardiovascular stent application. Biomatter. 2016; 6 (1): e959874.
66.
ShuaiCYangWYangY. Selective laser melted Fe-Mn bone scaffold: microstructure, corrosion behavior and cell response. Mater Res Express. 2020; 7 (1): 015404.
67.
YangCHuanZWangX. 3D printed Fe scaffolds with HA nanocoating for bone regeneration. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018; 4 (2): 608–616.
68.
Mohd DaudNSingNBYusopAH. Degradation and in vitro cell–material interaction studies on hydroxyapatite-coated biodegradable porous iron for hard tissue scaffolds. J Orthop Translat. 2014; 2 (4): 177–184.
69.
YusopAHMDaudNMNurH. Controlling the degradation kinetics of porous iron by poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) infiltration for use as temporary medical implants. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 11194.
70.
HeJHeF-LLiD-W. A novel porous Fe/Fe-W alloy scaffold with a double-layer structured skeleton: preparation, in vitro degradability and biocompatibility. Colloids Surf B. 2016; 142: 325–333.
71.
OrinakovaROrinakABuckovaLM. Iron based degradable foam structures for potential orthopedic applications. Int J Electrochem Sci. 2013; 8 (12): 12451–12465.
72.
FengYPBlanquerAFornellJ. Novel Fe–Mn–Si–Pd alloys: insights into mechanical, magnetic, corrosion resistance and biocompatibility performances. J Mater Chem B. 2016; 4 (39): 6402–6412.
73.
SuYChampagneSTrenggonoA. Development and characterization of silver containing calcium phosphate coatings on pure iron foam intended for bone scaffold applications. Mater Des. 2018; 148: 124–134.
74.
SharmaPPandeyPM.Corrosion behaviour of the porous iron scaffold in simulated body fluid for biodegradable implant application. Mater Sci Eng C. 2019; 99: 838–852.
75.
SharmaPPandeyPM.Corrosion rate modelling of biodegradable porous iron scaffold considering the effect of porosity and pore morphology. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2019; 103: 109776.
76.
CarluccioDXuCVenezuelaJ. Additively manufactured iron-manganese for biodegradable porous load-bearing bone scaffold applications. Acta Biomater. 2020; 103: 346–360.
77.
WangHZhengYLiuJ. In vitro corrosion properties and cytocompatibility of Fe-Ga alloys as potential biodegradable metallic materials. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017; 71: 60–66.
78.
ChenYZhangWMaitzMF. Comparative corrosion behavior of Zn with Fe and Mg in the course of immersion degradation in phosphate buffered saline. Corros Sci. 2016; 111: 541–555.
79.
HuangTChengJBianD. Fe–au and Fe–Ag composites as candidates for biodegradable stent materials. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater. 2016; 104 (2): 225–240.
80.
MoravejMPrimaFFisetM. Electroformed iron as new biomaterial for degradable stents: development process and structure–properties relationship. Acta Biomater. 2010; 6 (5): 1726–1735.
81.
ChengJHuangTZhengYF.Relatively uniform and accelerated degradation of pure iron coated with micro-patterned Au disc arrays. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2015; 48: 679–687.
82.
HuangTZhengY.Uniform and accelerated degradation of pure iron patterned by Pt disc arrays. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 23627.
83.
ObayiCSToloueiRPaternosterC. Influence of cross-rolling on the micro-texture and biodegradation of pure iron as biodegradable material for medical implants. Acta Biomater. 2015; 17: 68–77.
QinYWenPGuoH. Additive manufacturing of biodegradable metals: current research status and future perspectives. Acta Biomater. 2019; 98: 3–22.
86.
LiZ-GZhangX-GHuangP. Preparation and properties of open-cell zinc foams as human bone substitute material. China Foundry. 2019; 16 (6): 414–422.
87.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeD. Surface modification of biodegradable porous Mg bone scaffold using polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite. Mater Sci Eng C. 2015; 49: 436–444.
88.
WitteFKaeseVHaferkampH. In vivo corrosion of four magnesium alloys and the associated bone response. Biomaterials. 2005; 26 (17): 3557–3563.
LiuCWangJGaoC. Enhanced osteoinductivity and corrosion resistance of dopamine/gelatin/rhBMP-2-coated β-TCP/Mg-Zn orthopedic implants: an in vitro and in vivo study. PLoS ONE. 2020; 15 (1): e0228247.
91.
ZhangY-QLiYLiuH. Mechanical and biological properties of a biodegradable Mg-Zn-Ca porous alloy. Orthop Surg. 2018; 10 (2): 160–168.
92.
OriňákAOriňákováRKrálováZO. Sintered metallic foams for biodegradable bone replacement materials. J Porous Mater. 2014; 21 (2): 131–140.
93.
ScarcelloEHerpainATomatisM. Hydroxyl radicals and oxidative stress: the dark side of Fe corrosion. Colloids Surf B. 2019: 110542.
94.
HeYFMaYGaoC. Iron overload inhibits osteoblast biological activity through oxidative stress. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2013; 152 (2): 292–296.
95.
FagaliNSGrilloCAPuntaruloS. Is there any difference in the biological impact of soluble and insoluble degradation products of iron-containing biomaterials?Colloids Surf B. 2017; 160: 238–246.
96.
ZhuSHuangNXuL. Biocompatibility of pure iron: in vitro assessment of degradation kinetics and cytotoxicity on endothelial cells. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2009; 29 (5): 1589–1592.
97.
ZhangEChenHShenF.Biocorrosion properties and blood and cell compatibility of pure iron as a biodegradable biomaterial. J Mater Sci: Mater Med. 2010; 21 (7): 2151–2163.
98.
LiYLiuXTanL. Enoxacin-loaded poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) coating on porous magnesium scaffold as a drug delivery system: antibacterial properties and inhibition of osteoclastic bone resorption. J Mater Sci Technol. 2016; 32 (9): 865–873.
99.
KangM-HJangT-SKimSW. MgF2-coated porous magnesium/alumina scaffolds with improved strength, corrosion resistance, and biological performance for biomedical applications. Mater Sc Eng C. 2016; 62: 634–642.
100.
HakimiOVenturaYGoldmanJ. Porous biodegradable EW62 medical implants resist tumor cell growth. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016; 61: 516–525.
101.
SeyedraoufiZSMirdamadiS.In vitro biodegradability and biocompatibility of porous Mg-Zn scaffolds coated with nano hydroxyapatite via pulse electrodeposition. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China. 2015; 25 (12): 4018–4027.
102.
KangM-HLeeHJangT-S. Biomimetic porous Mg with tunable mechanical properties and biodegradation rates for bone regeneration. Acta Biomater. 2019:84:453-467.
103.
YangYZhouJDetschR. Biodegradable nanostructures: degradation process and biocompatibility of iron oxide nanostructured arrays. Mater Sci Eng C. 2018; 85: 203–213.
104.
MaoLYuanGWangS. A novel biodegradable Mg–Nd–Zn–Zr alloy with uniform corrosion behavior in artificial plasma. Mater Lett. 2012; 88: 1–4.
SezerNEvisZKoçM.Additive manufacturing of biodegradable magnesium implants and scaffolds: review of the recent advances and research trends. J Magnesium Alloys. 2020; Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2020.09.014
107.
EntezariARoohaniILiG. Architectural design of 3D printed scaffolds controls the volume and functionality of newly formed bone. Adv Healthc Mater. 2019; 8 (1): 1801353.
108.
CallensSJPUyttendaeleRJCFratila-ApachiteiLE. Substrate curvature as a cue to guide spatiotemporal cell and tissue organization. Biomaterials. 2020; 232: 119739.
109.
BhattacharyaKHoffmannESchinsRFP. Comparison of micro- and nanoscale Fe+3–containing (hematite) particles for their toxicological properties in human lung cells in vitro. Toxicol Sci. 2012; 126 (1): 173–182.
110.
ParamithaDEstuningsihSNovianaD. Distribution of Fe-based degradable materials in mice skeletal muscle. European Cells Mater. 2013; 26: 55.
111.
MangalampalliBDumalaNPerumalla VenkataR. Genotoxicity, biochemical, and biodistribution studies of magnesium oxide nano and microparticles in albino wistar rats after 28-day repeated oral exposure. Environ Toxicol. 2018; 33 (4): 396–410.
112.
FengQLiuYHuangJ. Uptake, distribution, clearance, and toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles with different sizes and coatings. Sci Rep. 2018; 8 (1): 2082.
113.
AramiHKhandharALiggittD. In vivo delivery, pharmacokinetics, biodistribution and toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles. Chem Soc Rev. 2015; 44j (23): 8576–8607.
114.
MittagASchneiderTWestermannM. Toxicological assessment of magnesium oxide nanoparticles in HT29 intestinal cells. Arch Toxicol. 2019; 93 (6): 1491–1500.
115.
NorénKLoringJSBargarJr. Adsorption mechanisms of EDTA at the water−iron oxide interface: implications for dissolution. J Phys Chem C. 2009; 113 (18): 7762–7771.
