Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36686623›Full record

ArticleProgress in materials science2023

Improving Biocompatibility for Next Generation of Metallic Implants.

Amit Bandyopadhyay, Indranath Mitra, Stuart B Goodman, Mukesh Kumar, Susmita Bose

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Progress in materials science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Corrosion-fatigue of additively manufactured Ti6Al4V.Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Effect of Nano-TiOMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amit BandyopadhyayW. M. Keck Biomedical Materials Research Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-2920.
Indranath MitraW. M. Keck Biomedical Materials Research Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-2920.
Stuart B GoodmanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Redwood City, CA 94063.
Mukesh KumarLincotek Medical, Bartlett, TN, USA.
Susmita BoseW. M. Keck Biomedical Materials Research Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-2920.

Funding

Bio-tribo-corrosion resistant 3D Printed Composites for Load-bearing ImplantsR01AR078241 · NIAMS · WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI AMIT BANDYOPADHYAY · 2021 to 2026
$1.8M
3D Printed Surface Modified Porous Metal Coatings for Load-Bearing ImplantsR01AR067306 · NIAMS · WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BANDYOPADHYAY, AMIT · 2015 to 2019
$1.8M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR067306NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR078241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing need for joint replacement surgeries, musculoskeletal repairs, and orthodontics worldwide prompts emerging technologies to evolve with healthcare's changing landscape. Metallic orthopaedic materials have a shared application history with the aerospace industry, making them only partly efficient in the biomedical domain. However, suitability of metallic materials in bone tissue replacements and regenerative therapies remains unchallenged due to their superior mechanical properties, eventhough they are not perfectly biocompatible. Therefore, exploring ways to improve biocompatibility is the most critical step toward designing the next generation of metallic biomaterials. This review discusses methods of improving biocompatibility of metals used in biomedical devices using surface modification, bulk modification, and incorporation of biologics. Our investigation spans multiple length scales, from bulk metals to the effect of microporosities, surface nanoarchitecture, and biomolecules such as DNA incorporation for enhanced biological response in metallic materials. We examine recent technologies such as 3D printing in alloy design and storing surface charge on nanoarchitecture surfaces, metal-on-metal, and ceramic-on-metal coatings to present a coherent and comprehensive understanding of the subject. Finally, we consider the advantages and challenges of metallic biomaterials and identify future directions.

Indexed as

3D Printingadditive manufacturingAlloysBiocompatibilityImplantsMetals

Identifiers

PMID36686623
PMCPMC9851385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.