Metallic Biomaterials

  • Robert M. Pilliar


Metallic biomaterials continue to be used extensively for the fabrication of surgical implants primarily for the same reason that led to their initial selection for these devices many decades ago. The high strength and resistance to fracture that this class of material can provide, assuming proper processing, gives reliable long-term implant performance in major load-bearing situations. Coupled with a relative ease of fabrication of both simple and complex shapes using well-established and widely available fabrication techniques (e.g., casting, forging, machining), this has promoted metal use in the fields of orthopedics and dentistry primarily, the two areas in which highly loaded devices are most common although similar reasons have led to their use for forming cardiovascular devices (e.g., artificial heart valves, blood conduits and other components of heart assist devices, vascular stents), and neurovascular implants (aneurysm clips). In addition, the good electrical conductivity of metals favors their use for neuromuscular stimulation devices, the most common example being cardiac pacemakers. These favorable properties (good fracture resistance, electrical conductivity, formability) are related to the metallic interatomic bonding that characterizes this class of material. While the purpose of this chapter is to focus on the important issues pertaining to the processing and performance of metallic biomaterials and to review the metals that are currently used for implant fabrication, a brief review of fundamental issues related to the structure-property relations of metals in general follows.


Fatigue Strength Austenitic Stainless Steel Fatigue Crack Initiation NiTi Alloy Excellent Corrosion Resistance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Ashby MF and Jones DR. Engineering Materials 1. An Introduction to their Properties and Applications, and 2. An Introduction to Microstructures, Processing and Design, Pergamon Press: London, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Newey C and Weaver G. Materials Principles and Practice, Butterworth Scientific Ltd.: Guildford 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Callister WD Jr. Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction, 6th ed, Chapter 7, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wayman CM and Duerig TW. An introduction to martensite and shape memory, in Deurig TW, Melton KN, Stockel, D, and Wayman, CM, eds. Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory Alloys, 1990, pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pilliar RM. Modern metal processing for improved load-bearing surgical implants. Biomaterials, 1991, 12: 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williams DF. Corrosion of orthopedic implants, in Williams DF, ed. Biocompatibility of Orthopedic Implants, Vol 1, chap. 6, CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davis JR, ed. Metallic Materials, Chapter 3, in Handbook of Materials for Medical Devices, ASM International, Materials park, Ohio, USA, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pilliar RM and Weatherly GC. Developments in implant alloys, CRC Critical Reviews in Biocompatibility, Vol 1, 1986, pp. 371–403.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sigwart U. Endoluminal Stenting, WB Saunders Co Ltd: London, UK, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tandon R. Ne-shaping of Co-Cr-Mo (F75) via Metal Injection Molding, in Disegi JA, Kennedy RL, and Pilliar R, eds. Cobalt-Base Alloys for Biomedical Applications, ASTM STP 1365, American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, pp. 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kilner T, Laanemae WM, Pilliar RM, Weatherly GC, and MacEwen SR. Static mechanical properties of cast and sinter-annealed cobalt-chromium surgical implants, J Mater Sci, 1986, 21: 1349–1356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taylor RNJ and Waterhouse RB. A study of aging behaviour of a cobaltbased implant alloy, J Mater Sci, 1983, 18:3265–3280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kilner T, Pilliar RM, Weatherly GC, and Allibert C. Phase identification and incipient melting in a cast co-Cr surgical implant alloy. J Biomed mater Res, 1982, 16:63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang KK. A dispersion strengthened Co-Cr-Mo alloy for medical implants, in Disegi JA, Kennedy RL, Pilliar R, eds. Cobalt-Base Alloys for Biomedical Applications, ASTM STP 1365, American Society for Testing and Materials West: Conshohocken, PA, 1999, pp. 89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berlin RM, Gustavson LJ, and Wang KK. Influence of post processing on the mechanical properties of investment cast and wrought Co-Cr-Mo alloys, in Disegi JA, Kennedy RL, Pilliar R, eds. Cobalt-Base Alloys for Biomedical Applications, ASTM STP 1365, American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, pp. 62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mishra AK, Hamby MA, and Kaiser WB. Metallurgy, microstructure, chemistry and mechanical properties of a new grade of cobalt-chromium alloy before and after porous-coating, in Disegi JA, Kennedy RL, Pilliar R, eds. Cobalt-Base Alloys for Biomedical Applications, ASTM STP 1365, American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, 1999, pp. 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pilliar RM. Powder metal-made orthopaedic implants with porous surfaces for fixation by tissue ingrowth, Clin Orthop Rel Res, 1983, 176:42–51.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pilliar RM. Porous-surfaced metallic implants for orthpedic applications, J Biomed Mater res, 1987, A1:1–33.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ankem S and Seagle SR. Heat treatment of metastable beta titanium alloys, in Rosenberg H and Boyer RR, eds. Beta Titantium Alloys in the 1980’s, AIME: New York, 1984, pp. 107–126.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Long M and Rack HJ. Titanium alloys in total joint replacement – a materials science perspective, Biomaterials, 1998, 19:1621–1639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yue S, Pilliar RM, and Weatherly GC. The fatigue strength of porous-coated Ti-6Al-4 V implant alloy. J Biomed Mat Res, 1984 18: 1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bania PJ. Beta titanium alloys and their role in the titanium industry, in Eylon D, Boyer RR and Koss DA, eds. Beta Titanium Alloys in the 1990’s, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Soc.: Warrendale, PA, 1993, pp. 3–14.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mishra AK, Davidson JA, Poggie RA, Kovacs P, and Fitzgerald TJ. Mechanical and tribological properties and biocompatibility of diffusion hardened Ti- 13Nb-13Zr – A new titanium alloy for surgical implants, in Medical Applications of Titanium and its Alloys: The Material and Biological Issues ASTM STP1272, 1996, pp. 96–113.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Benezra V, Mangin S, Treska M, Spector M, Hunter G, and Hobbs LW. Microstructural investigation of the oxide scale of Zr-2.5Nb and its interface with the alloy substrate, in Biomedical Materials-Drug Delivery, Implants and Tissue Engineering, Mater Res Soc Symp Proc, 1999, 550: 337–342.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Haasters J, v Salis-Salio G, and Bensmann G. The use of Ni-Ti as an implant in orthopaedics, in Deurig TW, Melton KN, Stockel D, and Wayman CM, eds. Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory Alloys, 1990, pp. 426–444.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wever DJ, Veldhuizen AG, Sanders MM, Schakenrad JM, and van Horn JR. Cytotoxic, allergic and genotoxic activity of a nickel-titanium alloy. Biomaterials, 1997, 18:1115–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kapanen A, Ryhanen J, Danilov A, and Tuukkanen J. Effect of nickel-titanium shape memory alloy on bone formation. Biomaterials, 2001, 22: 2475–2480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Firstov GS, Vitchev RG, Kumar H, Blanpain B, and Van Humbeeck J. Surface oxidation of NiTi shape memory alloy. Biomaterials, 2002, 23:4863–4871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cisse O, Savadogo O, Wu M, and Yahia LH. Effect of surface treatment of NiTi alloy on its corrosion behavior in Hanks’ solution. J Biomed Mater Res, 2002, 61: 339–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Assad M, Chernyshov AV, Jarzem P, Leroux MA, Coillard C, Charette S, and Rivard C-H. Porous titanium-nickel for intervertebral fusion in a sheep model: Part 2. Surface analysis and nickel release assessment. J Biomed Mater Res Pt B: Appl Biomater, 2003, 64B:121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zardiackas LD, Parsell DE, Dillon LD, Mitchell DW, Nunnery LA, and Poggie R. Structure, metallurgy and mechanical properties of a porous tantalum foam. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater), 2001, 58:180–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bobyn JD, Stackpool GJ, Hacking SA, Tanzer M, and Krygier JJ. Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. J Bone Jt Surg, 1999, 81-B: 907–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials, in Anusavice KJ, ed. Dental Amalgam: Structures and Properties, chap 17, 10th Edition, 1996.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pilliar RM. An Overview of Surface Variability of Metallic Endosseous Dental Implants: Textured and Porous surface-Structured Designs. Implant Dent, 1998, 7: 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baker SP. Plastic deformation and strength of materials in small dimensions. Mat Sci Eng, 2001, 319–321: 16–23.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cheng D, Tellkamp VL, Lavernia CJ, and Lavernia EJ. Corrosion properties of nanocrystalline Co-Cr coatings. Ann Biomed Eng, 2001, 29: 803–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations