How useful is SBF in predicting in vivo bone bioactivity

Biodegradable and bioactive porous polymer/inorganic composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering

Whereas second-generation biomaterials were designed to be either resorbable or bioactive, the next generation of biomaterials is combining these two properties, with the aim of developing materials that, once implanted, will help the body heal itself.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/295/5557/1014.full.pdf

Third-generation Biomedical Materials

Historically the function of biomaterials has been to replace diseased or damaged tissues. First generation biomaterials were selected to be as bio-inert as possible and thereby minimize formation of scar tissue at the interface with host tissues. Bioactive glasses were discovered in 1969 and provided for the first time an alternative; second generation, interfacial bonding of an implant with host tissues. Tissue regeneration and repair using the gene activation properties of Bioglass® provide a third generation of biomaterials. This article reviews the 40 year history of the development of bioactive glasses, with emphasis on the first composition, 45S5 Bioglass®, that has been in clinical use since 1985. The steps of discovery, characterization, in vivo and in vitro evaluation, clinical studies and product development are summarized along with the technology transfer processes.

The story of Bioglass

Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids.

The development of a bone-bonding calcia-phosposilicate glass-ceramic is discussed. A theoretical model to explain the interfacial bonding is based upon in-vitro studies of glass-ceramic solubility in interfacial hydroxyapatite crystallization mechanisms, compared with in-vivo rat femur implant histology and ultrastructure results.

R. J. Splinter

Papers

Bonding mechanisms at the interface of ceramic prosthetic materials