Porosity in Biomaterials: A Key Factor in the Development of Applied Materials in Biomedicine

  • Manuel AhumadaEmail author
  • Erik Jacques
  • Cristian Calderon
  • Fabián Martínez-Gómez
Reference work entry


Very often, porosity is the main factor taken into account during the design and synthesis of a material. Many applications can be directly correlated to the porosity of a given material, in uses such as catalysts, absorbents, drug carriers, combustible production, waste management, micro-electronics, medical diagnosis, among others. Three main characteristics describe the catalytic properties of a pore: it allows specific interactions, can be chemically and physically built from scratch to guarantee the best interaction with the target molecule, and its presence exponentially increases the available surface area. In the current chapter, we will focus on porosity in soft materials designed for biomedical applications, specifically hydrogels, giving an overview of their physicochemical behavior and the role of porosity in biomaterial development and characterization.


  1. 1.
    Smith L (2017) Chapter twelve – Historical perspectives on water purification A2. In: Ahuja S (ed) Chemistry and water. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 421–468Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu PS, Chen GF (2014) Chapter eight – Applications of polymer foams. In: Porous materials. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, pp 383–410Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zdravkov BD et al (2007) Pore classification in the characterization of porous materials: a perspective. Cent Eur J Chem 5(2):385–395Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kodikara J, Barbour S, Fredlund D (1999) Changes in clay structure and behaviour due to wetting and drying. In: Proceedings 8th Australia New Zealand conference on geomechanics: consolidating knowledge. Australian Geomechanics Society. Barton, ACTGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaneko K (1994) Determination of pore size and pore size distribution. J Membr Sci 96(1): 59–89Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rouquerol J et al (1994) Recommendations for the characterization of porous solids (Technical report). Pure Appl Chem 66(8):1739–1758Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loucks RG et al (2012) Spectrum of pore types and networks in mudrocks and a descriptive classification for matrix-related mudrock pores. AAPG Bull 96(6):1071–1098Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Champoux Y, Allard JF (1991) Dynamic tortuosity and bulk modulus in air-saturated porous media. J Appl Phys 70(4):1975–1979Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Keulen J (1973) Density of porous solids. Mater Constr 6(3):181–183Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sarkisov L (2012) Accessible surface area of porous materials: understanding theoretical limits. Adv Mater 24(23):3130–3133Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    He T et al (2014) Bio-template mediated in situ phosphate transfer to hierarchically porous TiO2 with localized phosphate distribution and enhanced photoactivities. J Phys Chem C 118(9):4607–4617Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rodriguez-Albelo LM et al (2017) Selective sulfur dioxide adsorption on crystal defect sites on an isoreticular metal organic framework series. Nat Commun 8:1–10Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alaaeddin A et al (2015) Rapid removal of organic micropollutants from water by a porous β-cyclodextrin polymer. Nature 529:190–194Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang CF, Chen LT (2017) Preparation of superwetting porous materials for ultrafast separation of water-in-oil emulsions. Langmuir 33(8):1969–1973Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thommes M (2010) Physical adsorption characterization of nanoporous materials. Chem Ing Tech 82(7):1059–1073Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vanson J-M et al (2015) Unexpected coupling between flow and adsorption in porous media. Soft Matter 11(30):6125–6133Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lu M et al (2016) Chemisorption mechanism of DNA on mg/Fe layered double hydroxide nanoparticles: insights into engineering effective SiRNA delivery systems. Langmuir 32(11): 2659–2667Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCusker LB, Liebau F, Engelhardt G (2003) Nomenclature of structural and compositional characteristics of ordered microporous and mesoporous materials with inorganic hosts:(IUPAC recommendations 2001): (IUPAC recommendations 2001). Microporous Mesoporous Mater 58(1):3–13Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weisz PB (1995) Molecular-diffusion in microporous materials-formalisms and mechanisms. Ind Eng Chem Res 34(8):2692–2699Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vattipalli V et al (2016) Long walks in hierarchical porous materials due to combined surface and configurational diffusion. Chem Mater 28(21):7852–7863Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reinecke SA, Sleep BE (2002) Knudsen diffusion, gas permeability, and water content in an unconsolidated porous medium. Water Resour Res 38(12):1280–1296Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vincent O, Marguet B, Stroock AD (2017) Imbibition triggered by capillary condensation in Nanopores. Langmuir 33(7):1655–1661Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Espanol M et al (2016) Impact of porosity and electrolyte composition on the surface charge of hydroxyapatite biomaterials. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(1):908–917Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hao GP et al (2016) Design of Hierarchically Porous Carbons with interlinked hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface and their capacitive behavior. Chem Mater 28(23):8715–8725Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li J et al (2013) Hydrophobic liquid-infused porous polymer surfaces for antibacterial applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5(14):6704–6711Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Odian GG, Odian GG (2004) Principles of polymerization. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robert O. Ebewele. Thermal transitions in polymers (2000) In: Polymer science and technology. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kurihara S (2004) Fast responsive liquid crystalline polymer systems. In: Reflexive polymers and hydrogels. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Koetting MC et al (2015) Stimulus-responsive hydrogels: theory, modern advances, and applications. Proc Mater Sci 93:1–49Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee KY, Yuk SH (2007) Polymeric protein delivery systems. Prog Polym Sci 32(7):669–697Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schmaljohann D (2006) Thermo- and pH-responsive polymers in drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 58(15):1655–1670Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Langer R, Peppas NA (2003) Advances in biomaterials, drug delivery, and bionanotechnology. AICHE J 49(12):2990–3006Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kim B, La Flamme K, Peppas NA (2003) Dynamic swelling behavior of pH-sensitive anionic hydrogels used for protein delivery. J Appl Polym Sci 89(6):1606–1613Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    van Der Sman RGM (2015) Biopolymer gel swelling analysed with scaling laws and Flory-Rehner theory. Food Hydrocoll 48:94–101Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bajpai AK et al (2008) Responsive polymers in controlled drug delivery. Prog Polym Sci 33(11):1088–1118Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vrentas JS, Vrentas CM (2003) Steady viscoelastic diffusion. J Appl Polym Sci 88(14): 3256–3263Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Amsden B (1998) Solute diffusion within hydrogels. Mechanisms and models. Macromolecules 31(23):8382–8395Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ganji F, Vasheghani-Farahani S, Vasheghani-Farahani E (2010) Theoretical description of hydrogel swelling: a review. Iranian Polym J 19(5):375–398Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cukier RI (1984) Diffusion of brownian spheres in semidilute polymer-solutions. Macromolecules 17(2):252–255Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hoffman AS (2012) Hydrogels for biomedical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 64:18–23Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Peppas NA, Khare AR (1993) Preparation, structure and diffusional behavior of hydrogels in controlled release. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 11(1):1–35Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fernandez-Nieves A et al (2000) Charge controlled swelling of microgel particles. Macromolecules 33(6):2114–2118Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hoare TR, Kohane DS (2008) Hydrogels in drug delivery: progress and challenges. Polymer 49(8):1993–2007Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brannon-Peppas L, Peppas NA (1991) Equilibrium swelling behavior of pH-sensitive hydrogels. Chem Eng Sci 46(3):715–722Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li H et al (2005) Modeling and simulation of the swelling behavior of pH-stimulus-responsive hydrogels. Biomacromolecules 6(1):109–120Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ricka J, Tanaka T (1984) Swelling of ionic gels-quantitative performance of the Donnan theory. Macromolecules 17(12):2916–2921Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kurnia JC, Birgersson E, Mujumdar AS (2011) Analysis of a model for pH-sensitive hydrogels. Polymer 53(2):613–622Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chai Q, Jiao Y, Yu X (2017) Hydrogels for biomedical applications: their characteristics and the mechanisms behind them. Gels 3(1):6–21Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oyen ML (2014) Mechanical characterisation of hydrogel materials. Int Mater Rev 59(1): 44–59MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Anseth KS, Bowman CN, Brannon-Peppas L (1996) Mechanical properties of hydrogels and their experimental determination. Biomaterials 17(17):1647–1657Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rajinder Pal, Dynamic viscoelastic behavior of composites (2006) In: Rheology of particulate dispersions and composites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 355–372Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Deligkaris K et al (2010) Hydrogel-based devices for biomedical applications. Sens Actuators B 147(2):765–774Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hamidi M, Azadi A, Rafiei P (2008) Hydrogel nanoparticles in drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 60(15):1638–1649Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ullah F et al (2015) Classification, processing and application of hydrogels: a review. Mater Sci Eng C Mater 57:414–433Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zhai M et al (2002) Syntheses of PVA/starch grafted hydrogels by irradiation. Carbohydr Polym 50(3):295–303Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pescosolido L et al (2011) In situ forming IPN hydrogels of calcium alginate and dextran-HEMA for biomedical applications. Acta Biomater 7(4):1627–1633Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bajpai AK, Bajpai J, Shukla S (2002) Water sorption through a semi-interpenetrating polymer network (IPN) with hydrophilic and hydrophobic chains. React Funct Polym 50(1):9–21Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Haque MA, Kurokawa T, Gong JP (2012) Super tough double network hydrogels and their application as biomaterials. Polymer 53(9):1805–1822Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Zhou C, Wu Q (2011) A novel polyacrylamide nanocomposite hydrogel reinforced with natural chitosan nanofibers. Colloid Surf B 84(1):155–162Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Zain NAM, Suhaimi MS, Idris A (2011) Development and modification of PVA– alginate as a suitable immobilization matrix. Process Biochem 46(11):2122–2129Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Martínez-Gómez F et al (2017) In vitro release of metformin hydrochloride from sodium alginate/polyvinyl alcohol hydrogels. Carbohydr Polym 155:182–191Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Martínez-Gómez F et al (2015) Preparation and swelling properties of homopolymeric alginic acid fractions/poly(N-isopropyl acrylamide) graft copolymers. J Appl Polym Sci 132(32): 42398–42408Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Brunel F, El Gueddari NE, Moerschbacher BM (2013) Complexation of copper(II) with chitosan nanogels: toward control of microbial growth. Carbohydr Polym 92(2):1348–1356Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Yadav M, Rhee KY, Park SJ (2014) Synthesis and characterization of graphene oxide/carboxymethylcellulose/alginate composite blend films. Carbohydr Polym 110:18–25Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Li H et al (2017) Surface enhanced Raman scattering properties of dynamically tunable Nanogaps between au nanoparticles self-assembled on hydrogel microspheres controlled by pH. J Colloid Interface Sci 505:467–475Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Dong X et al (2016) Self-assembly of monodisperse composite microgels with bimetallic nanorods as core and PNIPAM as shell into close-packed monolayers and SERS efficiency. Mater Des 104:303–311Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dumitriu RP, Mitchell GR, Vasile C (2011) Multi-responsive hydrogels based on N-isopropylacrylamide and sodium alginate. Polym Int 60(2):222–233Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Agrahari V et al (2017) Real-time analysis of tenofovir release kinetics using quantitative phosphorus (31P) nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Pharm Sci 106:3005. In PressGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sallouh M et al (2015) 1H HR-MAS NMR spectroscopy as a simple tool to characterize peptide – functionalized hydrogels as a function of cross linker density. Polymer 56:141–146Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Medronho B et al (2017) From a new cellulose solvent to the cyclodextrin induced formation of hydrogels. Colloid Surf A 532:548. In PressGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Grant SC et al (2005) Alginate assessment by NMR microscopy. J Mater Sci Mater Med 16(6):511–514Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hills BP et al (2000) NMR studies of calcium induced alginate gelation. Part II. The internal bead structure. Magn Reson Chem 38(9):719–728Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Chu KC, Rutt BK (1997) Polyvinyl alcohol cryogel: an ideal phantom material for MR studies of arterial flow and elasticity. Magn Reson Med 37(2):314–319Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    de Celis Alonso B et al (2010) NMR relaxometry and rheology of ionic and acid alginate gels. Carbohydr Polym 82(3):663–669Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Colsenet R, Mariette F, Cambert M (2005) NMR relaxation and water self-diffusion studies in whey protein solutions and gels. J Agric Food Chem 53(17):6784–6790Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Taglienti A, Sequi P, Valentini M (2009) Kinetics of drug release from a hyaluronan-steroid conjugate investigated by NMR spectroscopy. Carbohydr Res 344(2):245–249Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Zhang C et al (2016) Hierarchical porous structures in cellulose: NMR relaxometry approach. Polymer 98:237–243Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Iijima M et al (2007) AFM studies on gelation mechanism of xanthan gum hydrogels. Carbohydr Polym 68(4):701–707Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pramanick AK et al (2011) Topographical heterogeneity in transparent PVA hydrogels studied by AFM. Mater Sci Eng C 32(2):222–227Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Vulpe R et al (2016) Crosslinked hydrogels based on biological macromolecules with potential use in skin tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol 84:174–181Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kulkarni RV et al (2010) Interpenetrating network hydrogel membranes of sodium alginate and poly(vinyl alcohol) for controlled release of prazosin hydrochloride through skin. Int J Biol Macromol 47(4):520–527Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Zhang Y-T et al (2017) Co-delivery of evodiamine and rutaecarpine in a microemulsion-based hyaluronic acid hydrogel for enhanced analgesic effects on mouse pain models. Int J Pharm 528(1–2):100–106Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Rasoulzadeh M, Namazi H (2017) Carboxymethyl cellulose/graphene oxide bio-nanocomposite hydrogel beads as anticancer drug carrier agent. Carbohyd Polym 168: 320–326Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Zhang XZ et al (2001) Preparation and characterization of fast response macroporous poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) hydrogels. Langmuir 17(20):6094–6099Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Zhang J-T, Bhat R, Jandt KD (2009) Temperature-sensitive PVA/PNIPAAm semi-IPN hydrogels with enhanced responsive properties. Acta Biomater 5(1):488–497Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Dumitriu RP, Mitchell GR, Vasile C (2011) Rheological and thermal behaviour of poly(N-isopropylacrylamide)/alginate smart polymeric networks. Polym Int 60(9):1398–1407Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Işıklan N, Küçükbalcı G (2012) Microwave-induced synthesis of alginate-graft-poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) and drug release properties of dual pH- and temperature-responsive beads. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 82(2):316–331Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Cheaburu CN et al (2013) Thermoresponsive sodium alginate-g-poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) copolymers III. Solution properties. J Appl Polym Sci 127(5):3340–3348Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Editorial Nature Materials (2009) Boom time for biomaterials. Nat Mater 8(6):439–439Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Caló E, Khutoryanskiy VV (2015) Biomedical applications of hydrogels: a review of patents and commercial products. Eur Polym J 65:252–267Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Wichterle O, Lim D (1960) Hydrophilic gels for biological use. Nature 185(4706):117–118Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Liu W et al (2008) Recombinant human collagen for tissue engineered corneal substitutes. Biomaterials 29(9):1147–1158Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Alarcon EI et al (2016) Coloured cornea replacements with anti-infective properties: expanding the safe use of silver nanoparticles in regenerative medicine. Nanoscale 8(12): 6484–6489Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lloyd AW, Faragher RG, Denyer SP (2001) Ocular biomaterials and implants. Biomaterials 22(8):769–785Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    am Ende MT, Mikos AG (1997) Diffusion-controlled delivery of proteins from hydrogels and other hydrophilic systems. Pharm Biotechnol 10:139–165Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lim HL et al (2014) Smart hydrogels as functional biomimetic systems. Biomater Sci 2(5): 603–618Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Schwalfenberg GK (2012) The alkaline diet: is there evidence that an alkaline pH diet benefits health? J Environ Public Health 2012:1–7Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Gupta P, Vermani K, Garg S (2002) Hydrogels: from controlled release to pH-responsive drug delivery. Drug Discov Today 7(10):569–579Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Qi H et al (2017) Dual responsive zein hydrogel membrane with selective protein adsorption and sustained release property. Mater Sci Eng C Mater 70:347–356Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Ma G et al (2017) Development of ionic strength/pH/enzyme triple-responsive zwitterionic hydrogel of the mixed l – glutamic acid and l – lysine polypeptide for site-specific drug delivery. J Mater Chem B 5(5):935–943Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Gutowska AB, Han Y, Feijen J, Kim SW (1992) Heparin release from thermosensitive hydrogels. J Control Release 22:95–104Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Jeong B et al (1997) Biodegradable block copolymers as injectable drug-delivery systems. Nature 388(6645):860–862Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Dong L, Jiang H (2007) Autonomous microfluidics with stimuli-responsive hydrogels. Soft Matter 3(10):1223–1230Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Holtz JH, Asher SA (1997) Polymerized colloidal crystal hydrogel films as intelligent chemical sensing materials. Nature 389(6653):829–832Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Brown LR et al (1996) Characterization of glucose-mediated insulin release from implantable polymers. J Pharm Sci 85(12):1341–1345Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Heller J et al (1978) Controlled drug release by polymer dissolution. I. Partial esters of maleic anhydride copolymers – properties and theory. J Appl Polym Sci 22(7):1991–2009Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    D’Emanuele A, Staniforth JN (1991) An electrically modulated drug delivery device: I. Pharm Res 8(7):913–918Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Baroli B (2007) Hydrogels for tissue engineering and delivery of tissue-inducing substances. J Pharm Sci 96(9):2197–2223Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Nicodemus GD, Bryant SJ (2008) Cell encapsulation in biodegradable hydrogels for tissue engineering applications. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 14(2):149–165Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Peretti GM et al (2006) Tissue engineered cartilage integration to live and devitalized cartilage: a study by reflectance mode confocal microscopy and standard histology. Connect Tissue Res 47(4):190–199Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Langer R, Tirrell DA (2004) Designing materials for biology and medicine. Nature 428(6982): 487–492Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Caliari SR, Burdick JA (2016) A practical guide to hydrogels for cell culture. Nat Methods 13(5):405–414Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    El-Sherbiny IM, Yacoub MH (2013) Hydrogel scaffolds for tissue engineering: progress and challenges. Glob Cardiol Sci Pract 2013(3):316–342Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Chen A, Davis BH (1999) UV irradiation activates JNK and increases alphaI(I) collagen gene expression in rat hepatic stellate cells. J Biol Chem 274(1):158–164Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Yang S et al (2001) The design of scaffolds for use in tissue engineering. Part I. Traditional factors. Tissue Eng 7(6):679–689Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Ahumada
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Erik Jacques
    • 1
  • Cristian Calderon
    • 3
  • Fabián Martínez-Gómez
    • 3
  1. 1.Bio-nanomaterials Chemistry and Engineering Laboratory, Division of Cardiac SurgeryUniversity of Ottawa Heart InstituteOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Centro de Nanotecnologia AplicadaFacultad de CienciasUniversidad MayorChile
  3. 3.Center of Medical Chemistry, Faculty of MedicineClínica Alemana – Universidad del DesarrolloSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations