Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The future of bioactive ceramics

  • Special Issue: ESB 2014
  • Biocompatibility Studies
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two important worldwide needs must be satisfied in the future; (1) treatment of the deteriorating health of an aging population and, (2) decreasing healthcare costs to meet the needs of an increased population. The ethical and economic dilemma is how to achieve equality in quality of care while at the same time decreasing cost of care for an ever-expanding number of people. The limited lifetime of prosthetic devices made from first-generation nearly inert biomaterials requires new approaches to meet these two large needs. This paper advises an expanded emphasis on: (1) regeneration of tissues and (2) prevention of tissue deterioration to meet this growing need. Innovative use of bioactive ceramics with genetic control of in situ tissue responses offers the potential to achieve both tissue regeneration and prevention. Clinical success of use of bioactive glass for bone regeneration is evidence that this concept works. Likewise the use of micron sized bioactive glass powders in a dentifrice for re-mineralization of teeth provides evidence that prevention of tissue deterioration is also possible. This opinion paper outlines clinical needs that could be met by innovative use of bioactive glasses and ceramics in the near future; including: regeneration of skeletal tissues that is patient specific and genetic based, load-bearing bioactive glass–ceramics for skeletal and ligament and tendon repair, repair and regeneration of soft tissues, and rapid low-cost analysis of human cell-biomaterial interactions leading to patient specific diagnoses and treatments using molecularly tailored bioceramics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hench LL, Splinter RJ, Allen WC, Greenlee TK. Bonding mechanisms at the interface of ceramic prosthetic materials. J Biomed Mater Res Symp. 1971;2(1):117–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beckham CA, Greenlee TK, Crebo AR. Bone formation at a ceramic implant interface. Calcif Tissue Res. 1971;8(2):165–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hench LL, Paschall HA. Direct chemical bonding of bioactive glass-ceramic materials and bone. J Biomed Mats Res Symp. 1973;4:25–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Piotrowski G, Hench LL, Allen WC, Miller GJ. Mechanical studies of bone bioglass interfacial bond. J Biomed Mater Res. 1975;9(4):47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Clark AE, Hench LL, Paschall HA. Influence of surface chemistry on implant interface histology—theoretical basis for implant materials selection. J Biomed Mater Res. 1976;10(2):161–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilson J, Pigott GH, Schoen FJ, Hench LL. Toxicology and biocompatibility of bioglasses. J Biomed Mater Res. 1981;15(6):805–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hench LL, Wilson J, Greenspan D. Bioglass: a short history and bibliography. J Aust Ceram Soc. 2004;40:1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hench LL. Bioceramics—from Concept to Clinic. J Am Ceram Soc. 1991;74(7):1487–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hench LL. Bioceramics. J Am Ceram Soc. 1998;81(7):1705–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hench LL. An introduction to bioceramics. 2nd ed. London: Imperial College Press; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones JR. Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(1):4457–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilson J, Low SB. Bioactive ceramics for periodontal treatment—comparative-studies in the patus monkey. J Appl Biomater. 1992;3(2):123–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Xynos ID, Hukkanen MVJ, Batten JJ, Buttery LD, Hench LL, Polak JM. Bioglass 45S5 stimulates osteoblast turnover and enhances bone formation in vitro: implications and applications for bone tissue engineering. Calcif Tissue Int. 2000;67(4):321–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hench LL, Polak JM, Xynos ID, Buttery LDK. Bioactive materials to control cell cycle. Mater Res Innov. 2000;3(6):313–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Xynos ID, Edgar AJ, Buttery LDK, Hench LL, Polak JM. Ionic products of bioactive glass dissolution increase proliferation of human osteoblasts and induce insulin-like growth factor II mRNA expression and protein synthesis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2000;276(2):461–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Xynos ID, Edgar AJ, Buttery LDK, Hench LL, Polak JM. Gene-expression profiling of human osteoblasts following treatment with the ionic products of Bioglass (R) 45S5 dissolution. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;55(2):151–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hench LL, Polak JM. Third-generation biomedical materials. Science. 2002;295(5557):1014–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hench LL, Xynos ID, Edgar AJ, Buttery LDK, Polak JM, Zhong JP, Liu XY, Chang J. Gene activating glasses. J Inorg Mater. 2002;17(5):897–909.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hoppe A, Gueldal NS, Boccaccini AR. A review of the biological response to ionic dissolution products from bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. Biomaterials. 2011;32(11):2757–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kokubo T, Ito S, Sakka S, Yamamuro T. Formation of a high-strength bioactive glass ceramic in the system MgO–CaO–SiO2–P2O5. J Mater Sci. 1986;21(2):536–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Peitl O, Zanotto ED, Serbena FC, Hench LL. Compositional and microstructural design of highly bioactive P2O5–Na2O-CaO-SiO2 glass-ceramics. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(1):321–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahony O, Tsigkou O, Ionescu C, Minelli C, Ling L, Hanly R, Smith ME, Stevens MM, Jones JR. Silica-gelatin hybrids with tailorable degradation and mechanical properties for tissue regeneration. Adv Funct Mater. 2010;20(22):3835–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tsigkou O, Pomerantseva I, Spencer JA, Redondo PA, Hart AR, O’Doherty E, Lin Y, Friedrich CC, Daheron L, Lin CP, Sundback CA, Vacanti JP, Neville C. Engineered vascularized bone grafts. PNAS. 2010;107(8):3311–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jung SB. Bioactive borate glasses. In: Jones JR, Clare AG, editors. Bio-glasses: an introduction. Chichester: Wiley; 2012. p. 75–96.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Gillette RL, Swaim SF, Sartin EA, Bradley DM, Coolman SL. Effects of a bioactive glass on healing of closed skin wounds in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2001;62(7):1149–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hu GF, Xiao LW, Tong PJ, Bi DW, Wang H, Ma HT, Zhu G, Liu H. Antibacterial hemostatic dressings with nanoporous bioglass containing silver. Int J Nanomed. 2012;7:2613–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Day RM. Bioactive glass stimulates the secretion of angiogenic growth factors and angiogenesis in vitro. Tissue Eng. 2005;11(5–6):768–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gorustovich AA, Roether JA, Boccaccini AR. Effect of bioactive glasses on angiogenesis: a review of in vitro and in vivo evidences. Tissue Eng Part B. 2010;16(2):199–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Leu A, Leach JK. Proangiogenic potential of a collagen/bioactive glass substrate. Pharm Res. 2008;25(5):1222–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Miguez-Pacheco V, Hench LL, Boccaccini AR. Bioactive glasses beyond bone and teeth: emerging applications in contact with soft tissues. Acta Biomater. 2015;13:1–15. doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2014.11.004.

  31. Hench LL, Greenspan D. Interactions between bioactive glass and collagen: a review and new perspectives. J Aust Ceram Soc. 2013;49(2):1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Notingher I, Bisson I, Bishop AE, Randle WL, Polak JMP, Hench LL. In situ spectral monitoring of mRNA translation in embryonic stem cells during differentiation in vitro. Anal Chem. 2004;76(11):3185–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Notingher L, Bisson I, Polak JM, Hench LL. In situ spectroscopic study of nucleic acids in differentiating embryonic stem cells. Vib Spectrosc. 2004;35(1–2):199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Notingher I, Jell G, Notingher PL, Bisson I, Tsigkou O, Polak JM, Stevens MM, Hench LL. Multivariate analysis of Raman spectra for in vitro non-invasive studies of living cells. J Mol Struct. 2005;744:179–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gentleman E, Swain RJ, Evans ND, Boonrungsiman S, Jell G, Ball MD, Shean TAV, Oyen ML, Porter A, Stevens MM. Comparative materials differences revealed in engineered bone as a function of cell-specific differentiation. Nat Mater. 2009;8(9):763–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Florida Institute of Technology, 150 W. University Blvd., Melbourne, FL, 32901, USA

    Larry L. Hench

Authors
  1. Larry L. Hench
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larry L. Hench.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hench, L.L. The future of bioactive ceramics. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 26, 86 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-015-5425-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-015-5425-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation