DOI: 10.1002/adem.

200800035

ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
Progress and Challenge for
Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials**
By Rongchang Zeng,* Wolfgang Dietzel, Frank Witte, Norbert Hort
and Carsten Blawert

Magnesium alloys are very biocompatiable and show promise for use in orthopaedic implant. Signifi-
cant progress of research on bioabsorbable magnesium stents and orthopaedic bones has been achieved
in recent years. The issues on degradation, hydrogen evolution, and corrosion fatigue and erosion
corrosion of magnesium alloys and various influencing factors in simulated body fluid (SBF) are
discussed. The research progress on magnesium and its alloys as biomaterials and miscellaneous
approaches to enhancement in corrosion resistance is reviewed. Finally the challenges and strategy for
their application as orthopaedic biomaterials are also proposed.

1. Introduction 320 mg/day.[6] Dietary magnesium deficiency has been impli-

Currently, there is a huge demand in the implant markets
in the world. There are 1.8–2.0 million cases of artificial
articulation replacements in the world. more than one million
stents are implanted in human arteries each year to counter-
act the effects of atherosclerosis. Indeed, the market for endo-
and cardiovascular stents was projected to exceed $7 billion
by the year 2006.[1]
There are four major types of materials: metals, ceramics
and polymer and their composites used as biomaterials.[2]
Metals are more suitable for load-bearing application com-
pared with ceramics or polymeric materials due to their com-
bination of high mechanical strength and fracture toughness.
Thus, metal implant materials including stainless steels
(316L), titanium alloys (Ti6Al4V) and cobalt-chromium-based
alloys have found a wide application.
Biomaterials should have a good biocompatibility. The cor-
rosion products, however, of most conventional surgical
alloys (such as cobalt, chromium and nickel-based products)
may be considered potentially harmful to tissues of the human
body,[3–4] whereas the corrosion product of magnesium is like-
ly to be physiologically beneficial than harmful. The adult
human body contains about 30 g of magnesium, most of it
existing in muscle and bone.[5] The U.S. Food and Nutrition
Board have recently reestablished the RDA for magnesium
for adult males to 420 mg/day and for adult females to
cated as a risk factor for osteoporosis.[7] In addition, magne-
sium binds strongly to phosphates. Thus, its presence influ-
ences the mineralisation of bony tissue through its control of
hydroxyapatite (HA) (calcium phosphate) formation.[8] Mag-
–
[*] Prof. Dr. R. Zeng
School of Materials Science and Engineering
Chongqing Institute of Technology
Xingsheng Rd.4, Chongqing 400050, China
Dr. W. Dietzel, Dr. N. Hort, Dr. C. Blawert
GKSS-Forschungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH
Max-Planck-Strasse 1, 21502 Geesthacht, Germany
Dr. F. Witte
Laboratory for Biomechanics and Biomaterials
Hannover Medical School
Anna-von-Borries-Str. 1–7, 30625 Hannover, Germany
[**] Rongchang Zeng expresses sincerely thanks to GKSS-For-
schungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH for the possibility of spend-
ing time at GKSS as a visiting scientist and acknowledge the
support from the Natural Science Foundation (CSTC,
2008BB0063) of Chongqing Sci. & Technol. Commission in
China, also thanks Dr. C. L. Liu for providing the articles on
his work.

ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008 © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim B3
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS

nesium depletion is attributed to cardiac arrhythmias, the

development of atherosclerosis, vasoconstriction of coronary
arteries and increased blood pressure in the cardiovascular
system.[8] Therefore, magnesium features popularly in wide
varieties of drugs and food supplements. The therapeutic win-
dow for magnesium supplements is wide and sideeffects are
rare. Together with calcium, sodium and potassium, magne-
sium is efficiently controlled in the body by homeostatic mech-
anisms and toxicity is not generally a problem.[8]
The advantage of magnesium is not only its good biocom-
patibility but also its mechanical properties. The specific den-
sity of magnesium and its alloy are approximately 1.7 g/cm3,
which is very similar to that of human calvarium bone
(1.75 g/cm3). The elastic modulus of pure magnesium is
45 GPa, which is much similar to that of human bone
(40–57 GPa), but only a half of that of Ti6Al4V.[9] Therefore,
orthopedic applications of magnesium are attractive for
Fig. 1. pH-potential diagram of Mg and its alloys in various SBFs. BSA-bovine serum
orthopedic surgeon and research; despite some of the first albumin. BSA 0.01 and BSA0.1 indicateing SBF with 0.01 g/L and 0.1 BSA, respec-
orthopedic magnesium alloys were not successful and were tively. MAO- macro arc oxidation.

fallen into disuse. Magnesium-based materials were first

introduced as orthopedic biomaterials in the first half of 20
century. The first use of magnesium in trauma surgery was magnesium in aqueous environment can be expressed as the
reported by Lambotte,[10–11] who applied a plate of pure mag- following partial reactions:
nesium with gold-plated steel nails to secure a fracture
involving the bones of the lower leg in 1907. Recently, Witte Anodic reaction:
et al.[12] conducted a cartilage repair on magnesium scaffolds Mg → Mg2+ + 2e (1)
(AZ91) used as a subchondral bone replacement. In-vivo
study by Witte[13] and Zhang[14] as well as Duygulu[15] etc. im-
plied that the magnesium alloy AZ31 implantation is benefi- Cathodic reaction:
cial to the new bone formation and biocompatible in animal 2H2O + 2e → 2OH- + H2 (2)
experiments.
This paper reviews the corrosion issues on magnesium
alloys, the recent progress on the studies of magnesium alloys Product formation:
as implant materials and discusses the influence of a variety Mg2+ + 2OH– → Mg (OH)2 (3)
of factors on corrosion behavior of magnesium alloys in order
to have a insight into the corrosion mechansim and protection
characteristics of magnesium alloys. The scientific challenges General reaction:
are also proposed based on our researches and the under- Mg + 2H2O →Mg (OH)2 + H2 (4)
standing of the works by other scientists.

2. Corrosion in Body Fluid 3. Forms of Corrosion

Corrosion is defined as the destruction or deterioration of
a material because of reaction with its environment under the
influence of chemical, physical and electrochemical factors.
corrosion in body fluid is more complicated than in natural
environments, because the degradation rate is affected by a
variety of factors such as protein, pH value change and
so on.[16]
2.1. Corrosion mechanism of magnesium
A modified pH-potential diagram of Mg and its alloys in
various SBFs is shown in Figure 1. The corrosion attack of
If applied as an orthopedic biomaterial, it will have to face
the following challenges: corrosion, fatigue and erosion or
their combined interactions. Fonta[17] classified corrosion into
eight typical forms: uniform/general corrosion, galvanic
corrosion/bimetal corrosion, pitting corrosion, crevice corro-
sion, intergranular corrosion, selective leaching/parting,
erosion corrosion, and stress corrosion. In additon, there are
more distinct types of corrosion such as fretting corrosion,
cavitation corrosion, corrosion fatigue, and hydrogen embrit-
tlement et al.[18] The most common corrosion types for mag-
nesium and its alloys in SBFs may be galvanic corrosion,
pitting corrosion and corrosion fatigue and erosion corrosion
as well:

B4 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
3.1. Galvanic Corrosion
Galvanic corrosion (or bimetallic corrosion) takes place
when two different metals with different electrochemical
potentials are in physical (electronic) contact and are soaked
in an ionic conducting fluid medium such as serum or inter-
stitial fluid. This is also refered to as couple corrosion. Galva-
nic corrosion is one of the major obstacles to the use of
magnesium parts in aggressive environments. Because mag-
nesium is the most active metal in the galvanic series, a mag-
nesium alloy implant is always an active anode if it was
contact with the other metals.[19] Even in the same materials,
galvanic attack can occur between matrix and intermetallic
particles. A schematic diagram of galvanic corrosion in hu-
man body fluids is shown in Figure 2. When a couple with
magnesium alloy plate and stainless steel screw is implanted
into human body, the magnesium alloy plate with a lower
potential is the anode, while the stainless steel screw with
relatively higher potential is the cathode. As a result, magne-
sium alloy implant is preferentially attacked. As mentioned
above, Lambotte[10] was the first doctor to use magnesium as
an implant in orthopedic and trauma surgery. Serious galva-
nic corrosion occurred because a plate of pure magnesium
coupled with gold-plated steel nails was applied.
3.2. Pitting Corrosion
Pitting corrosion occurs when discrete areas of a material
undergo rapid attack while the vast majority of the surface
remains virtually unaffected. Because the microstructure in
Mg-Al alloys usually is characterized by a-matrix, b
(Mg17Al12) phase and other intermetallic particles such as
Al8Mn5, corrosion pits often nucleated at these particles due
to their relatively higher potentials compared to the a-matrix.
Song[19] and Zeng[20] et al. summarized the roles of the inter-
metallic particles in the corrosion process. The corrosion pits
are also crack initiation sites of corrosion fatigue and stress
corrosion cracking. By in vitro investigation, Witte[21] et al.
found that pitting corrosion occurred on LAE442 and AZ91D,
AZ91D was almost destroyed by severe pitting, while the
LAE442 alloy showed a more uniform corrosion attack with
scattered areas of severe pitting.
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of galvanic corrosion in human body fluids.
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
3.3. Corrosion Fatigue
Corrosion fatigue is the metal damage that evolves with
accumulated cycling load, in an aggressive environment com-
pared to inert or benign surroundings, and resulting from the
interaction of irreversible cyclic plastic deformation with
localized chemical or electrochemical reactions. Corrosion
fatigue is a critical factor in determining the life of metallic
implants undergoing cyclic mechanical loading. For in-
stances, materials for use in bone substitutes and replacing
diseased heart valves must be selected for corrosion fatigue
resistance. Aqueous solutions can significantly decrease the
fatigue life of magnesium alloys.
Fatigue life significantly depends on the microstructure. It
will result in an obvious reduction in fatigue life, if there are
some defects such as oxide or pores at the surface and subsur-
face of a material. It was found that fatigue life of magnesium
alloy decreased with porosity, because the pores are always
the crack nucleation sites.[21–24] Stich[24] investigated the
fatigue behaviour of AZ91hp, AM60hp, AS21hp and AE42hp,
and found that cycles to failure were reverse proportion to
the pore area.
3.4. Erosion Corrosion
Dearnley[4] reported that numerous scratches were pro-
duced in vivo by quantities of wear debris on a Co-Cr-Mo
femoral head surface after 17 years of implantation. Huang
[25]
demonstrated that the wear quantity of AZ91D and
AM60B increased with increasing normal load, and de-
creased with increasing frequency. Govender[26] found that
the rate of erosion corrosion of AZ91 is 25 ∼ 80 times higher
than the immersion corrosion rate in 3.5 % NaCl solution. The
mass loss increased with increasing time. The combined in-
teraction of corrosion of a-matrix and wear caused serious
pitting corrosion. The depth of pits is affected by the impact
speed.
4. Hydrogen Evolution
The unfortunate complication is that pure magnesium cor-
rodes too quickly in the physiological pH (7.4–7.6) and high
chloride environment of the physiological system,[8] evolving
hydrogen gas in the corrosion process at a rate that is too fast
to be dealt with by the host tissue.[8] However, it was easily
treated by drawing off the gas with a subcutaneous needle.[8]
the in vivo corrosion study by Witte[12] shows all magnesium
implants exhibited clinically and radiographically visible sub-
cutaneous gas bubbles, which appeared within one week
after surgery and disappeared after 2–3 weeks. Song[27] con-
ducted corrosion tests of a variety of magnesium alloys in
SBF. The results show that the rate of hydrogen evolution of
commercial pure magnesium, ZE41, Mg1.0Zn, AZ91,
Mg2Zn0.2Mn and HP-Mg is 26, 1.502, 0.280, 0.068, 0.012 and
© 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.aem-journal.com B5
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
0.008 ml/cm2/day, respectively. He postulated hydrogen
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
evolution rate 0.01 ml/cm2/day as a tolerated level in the
human body. Thus, it is reasonable to believe that hydrogen
gas is not a serious problem, if a favorable magnesium alloy
with a suitable coating is applied as an implant material.
5. Influencing Factors
Corrosion evaluation in industrial environments and SBFs
displays the corrosion resistance of magnesium alloys is
strongly dependent on the alloy composition, alloying ele-
ments, heat treatment and on the corrosive characteristics of
the environment such as albumin, pH value etc.[20,28–29]
5.1. Influence of Alloying Elements
For a potential application of magnesium alloys as bioma-
terials, the lifetime is generally not long enough, due to seri-
ous corrosion problem. The corrosion properties can be im-
proved by purifying magnesium, alloying and appropriate
production processes. For instance, corrosion resistance can
be increased by reducing the contents of detrimental elements
such as Fe, Ni, Cu and Co and by fine microstructure ob-
tained by addition of alloying elements Zr, Ca, Sr and rare
earth etc.[30] It is notable[27] that Li can improve the corrosion
resistance of a MgLiAlRe alloy due to corroding Li increase
the pH value of the solution to a pH > 11.5. The in vivo corro-
sion measurements by Witte[13] demonstrate that magnesium
alloys AZ31, AZ91, WE43 and LAE442 implants degrade
depending on their composition of the alloying elements.
LAE442 has a lower corrosion rate, compared to AZ31 and
AZ91 as well as WE43.
The alloying elements: Zn, Mn, Ca and perhaps a very
small amount of low toxicity rare earth can be tolerated in the
human body and can also retard the biodegradation.[27] A
Zn/Mn-containing magnesium alloy, e.g. Mg2Zn0.2 Mn,
with satisfactory mechanical properties can be a potential bio-
degradable alloy.[27] The addition of calcium element into
magnesium alloys improves the general corrosion resistance
in chloride containing solutions.[31] Kannan[32] studied in-viv-
tro degradation of AZ91Ca (50 wt% Mg, 37 wt% Al, 13 wt%
Ca and 0.5 wt% Zn) and AZ61Ca (55 wt% Mg, 34 wt% Al,
7 wt% Ca and 1.0 wt% Zn) in SBFs, and suggested that cal-
cium addition significantly leads to an increase in corrosion
rate of AZ91DCa alloy compared with AZ91D alloy. It is,
however, noted that the corrosion property of magnesium
alloys highly depends on the magnitude of calcium addition.
Herein, there are some inconsistent reports. Li et al.[33] pro-
posed that the in-vitro corrosion rates of as-cast Mg-1Ca, Mg-
2Ca and Mg-3Ca alloys are 12.56, 12.98 and 25.00 mm/a,
respectively. That is, an increase in Ca content leads to the
enhancement in the formation of increasing intermetallic
compound Mg2Ca, and thus causes a decrease in the corro-
sion resistance of Mg-Ca alloys. The results demonstrate that
B6 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Mg-1Ca alloy has a better corrosion resistance as a potential
implant material, compared with other Mg-Ca alloys.
5.2. Infuence of Microstructure
It is beneficial for magnesium alloys to have finer and
more homogeneous microstructure. For example, rapid solid-
ification rates alter this microstructure. In melt-spun ribbons
containing 9.6–23.4 %Al, Hehmann et al.[34] observed the
suppression of the Mg17Al12 phase and the formation of
an extended solid solution. Rapid solidification ameliorates
the repassivation behavior of Mg-Al alloys; this repassivation
is superior for alloys containing more aluminium.[35] A
further discussion, particularly on the role of b phases in
the corrosion of magnesium, can be found in the litera-
tures.[20,28]
5.3. Influence of Manufacture Processing
Because the corrosion behavior of magnesium alloys is
attributed to the microstructure fabricated by various pro-
cessing. Li[33] pointed out that hot rolling and hot extrusion
processes can reduce the corrosion rate of Mg-Ca alloys.
For instance, the corrosion current densities of as-cast, as-
rolled and as-extruded Mg-1Ca alloys are 12.56, 1.63 and
1.74 mm/a due to a formation of finer microstructure caused
by rolling and extrusion processes. The degradation of Mg-
1Ca alloy in-vivo is much slower than that of in-vitro electro-
chemical tests due to the influencing factors such as lower
concentration of Cl– ions present in blood plasma and bone,
proteins etc.
5.4. Influence of Heat Treatment
Heat treatment can change the microstructure and corro-
sion property of magnesium alloys. Aging makes Al atoms in
Mg-Al alloys diffuse towards grain boundaries and form pre-
cipitation of the b phase, thus, reducing the aluminum con-
centration in the a-Mg matrix.[20,36] Generally, ageing treat-
ment reduces the corrosion rate of Mg-Al alloys in chloride
solutions.[36] The same is true for the corrosion rate of the
aged die-cast AZ63 alloys in SBF. Liu[37] investigated the in-
fluence of heat treatment (solution treatment at 413 °C for
24 h followed by aging at 216 °C for 1, 5.5, 12 h) on degrada-
tion behavior of die-cast AZ63 alloy. A 14-day immersion test
in Tyrode’s simulated body fluid showed that the lowest cor-
rosion rate of the treated alloys is approximately a half of that
of the untreated alloy. Furthermore, the variation in micro-
structure thus leads to alteration in corrosion morphology:
shallow filiform and pitting corrosion for the aged materials,
in a contrast, deep and uniform corrosion for the untreated
alloys is observed.
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
5.5. Influence of Albumin
Proteins affected metallic corrosion usually by changing
either anodic or cathodic processes, or both.[33] Liu[38] recom-
mended that interactions between proteins and the implant
surfaces alter the corrosion process and properties. Figure 1
shows that the addition of bovine serum albumin (BSA) sig-
nificantly shifts the open-circuit potential toward a more pos-
itive value in SBF and tends to retard the localized corrosion.
It is particularly noteworthy that the proteins shift the poten-
tials to nobler values over the hydrogen line and below the
oxygen line, where is so-called hydrogen ions stable region.
And thus the formation of H2 or the corrosion reaction is sup-
pressed. Moreover, the results by Liu[38] reveal that the corro-
sion resistance in SBFs with 1 g/L BSA is approximately
twice that in SBFs. A higher BSA concentration declines the
corrosion susceptibility, probably resulting from the ad-
sorbed BSA offering an enhanced insulting nature between
the surface oxide film and the electrolyte and a significant
increase in potential (shown in Fig. 1). It is explained by the
fact that after open-circuit exposure to the SBF containing
BSA, albumin adsorbs on the surface of samples because of
the surface film mainly consisted of Mg(OH)2 that grows rap-
idly in the solution containing Cl– or SO42–, and the divalent
Mg2+ interacting with BSA easily.[38] In addition, the freshly
formed albumin layer constitutes a corrosion resistant layer
with great impedance. Mueller[39] also proposed that the
potential range of the passivation region was extended in the
presence of albumin for magnesium alloys AZ31 and
LAE442.
5.6. Influence of pH Value
The pH value of the medium has an important impact on
the corrosion morphology. Generally, pitting corrosion of
magnesium alloys occurs in neutral or alkaline salt solutions.
While corrosion does hardly take place, when the pH value is
higher than 11.5. The corrosion rate of the b phase is very low
when pH value is 4–14.[40] The corrosion rates of ingot and
die-cast AZ91 alloys and extruded AM60 alloy are higher in
acidic sodium chloride solutions compared with that in neu-
tral and highly alkaline solutions.[41,42]
Therefore, an accelerated corrosion on the magnesium
implant surface can be expected in vivo, since the normal
physiological pH value in human blood, interstititual and in-
tracellular is 7.15–7.35, 7.0 and 6.8, respectively.[43] Figure 1
exhibits a modified pH-potential diagram of Mg and its alloys
in various SBFs. The data is derived from the researches from
Liu[38] and Xu[44] and Chen.[45] It is apparent that all the mag-
nesium alloys are in the corrosive region and thus undergo
degradation inevitably. The low ellipse indicates the poten-
tials of materials were soaked in Hank’s solutions or 0.9 wt%
NaCl solutions. While, the upper ellipse shows the potentials
of AZ91 alloys immersed in the modified SBFs. It is mani-
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008 © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
fested that the corrosion process of magnesium alloys in
either sodium chloride or Hank’s solution is alkalinization.[46]
And the pH value increases up to approximately 10.5 and
fluctates this value with time, regardless of the initial pH val-
ue in test solutions.[46] The rise rate of pH value with the mass
fraction of chlorine ions has no obvious difference, but it
seems to slow down in distilled water and Hank’s soltions.
After the implant operation, however, it has been observed
that the pH value of the implanted part decreases to approxi-
mately 5.2 and then recovers after 10 to 15 days.[38] It means
that magnesium implants will suffer an accelerated attack in
the initial stage. It is reported that the acidic SBF can cause
short-term formation of a stable corrosion product layer but
allows a more severe corrosion attack in the long term.[38]
6. Progress on Research of Magnesium Alloys as
Biomaterials
So far, the largest progress of magnesium alloys as bioma-
terials has been achieved in bioabsorbable magnesium stents.
The first magnesium implant is the coronary magnesium
stent. The biodegradable magnesium stents, which is
sculpted by laser from a single tube of magnesium alloy
WE43, has been manufactured and undertaken clinical
trials.[47] Tests have proceeded from animal experiments to
preliminary clinical applications. These magnesium stents
carry the potential to overcome the limitations posed by per-
manent metallic stents such as chronic inflammation, late
stent thrombosis, prolonged antiplatelet therapy, and artifacts
when imaged by multislice-computed tomography or mag-
netic resonance imaging.[48] Heublein et al.[49] implanted 20
slotted magnesium alloy tube stents with a length of 10 mm
and uneven strut thickness of 150–200 lm in 11 pig coronary
arteries of reference diameter 2.5–3.5 mm. Mean neointimal
area was 1.41 mm2 after 35 days and 2.71 mm2 after 56 days.
Strut biocorrosion started to occur after 35 days and it was
estimated by extrapolation that this would be complete by 98
days. Waksman et al.[48] deployed magnesium alloy stents or
stainless steel stents in coronary arteries of domestic or mini-
pigs. The results showed that after 3 days, magnesium alloy
stents were still intact, but started to show signs of degrada-
tion by 28 days. No evidence of stent particle embolization,
thrombosis, excess inflammation or fibrin deposition was ob-
served. At 28 days and 3 months, neointimal area was signifi-
cantly less in magnesium alloy stent segments compared to
the stainless steel stent segments.
Above animal tests show that these bare magnesium stents
usually degrade without side effect in 1–3 months. Some pre-
liminary clinical trials further demonstrated that magnesium
stents are safe for human body. Zartner et al.[50] reported a
first successful implantation of magnesium stent into the left
pulmonary artery of a preterm baby born at 26 weeks of ge-
station in 2005. Implantation of a biodegradable magnesium
stent with a diameter of 3 mm and 10 mm length was per-
http://www.aem-journal.com B7
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
formed in a hybrid procedure when the baby weighed 1.7 kg.
After five month follow-up the degradation process had com-
pleted. Gruberg[51] reported that the BIOTRONIK absorbable
magnesium alloy stent undergoes degradation over a 2-to-3-
month period after implantation and may therefore reduce
restenosis without any further complications. In a current
study,[51] a total of 20 patients underwent a magnesium stent
implantation for the treatment of vascular lesions below the
knee. Average age of patients was 76 years, and 55 % were
clinical vascular status Rutherford class V (45 % were Clas-
s IV). Approximately half of patients had diabetes, with an
average lesion length of 11 mm. Early results of the study
found that at 1-month follow-up, there was 1 death and none
of the remaining patients required limb amputation. At
3-month follow-up, there was 100 % limb salvage in the 13
patients who had reached follow-up. It is suggested that these
clinical trials were encouraged and planned to test the safety
and efficacy of the stent in patients with coronary artery
lesions. Dr. Erbel from university Essen and his colleagues at
nine medical centers used the new magnesium stents to treat
63 patients.[52] They observed no alarming complications, in-
cluding blockage of the stent with a blood clot, heart attack,
or death during the first four months of follow-up.
The in vivo experiments above demonstrated that magne-
sium alloy implants seem to be a good candidate for stents,
further research is required before they can substitute for the
current conventional bare metal. The challenge is to develop
the stent with comparable mechanical properties, lower cor-
rosion rate and anti-inflammatory or anti-proliferative drugs.
6.1. Challenges and Strategies for Magnesium Alloys as
Orthopedic Implants
To be a bone replacement material, corrosion resistance of
the magnesium implants should be improved. The usual
methods of the improvement are to improve materials prop-
erties and look for appropriate coatings.
6.1.1. Improvements of Intrinsic Materials Properties
Magnesium Foam
Some researchers attempted to get porous magnesium me-
tallic foam, which is expected to have a similar structure and
properties to bone and use as a promising scaffold material.
The porous surfaces have been used in percutaneous, subcu-
taneous, orthopedic, and dental implants to promote tissue
interlocking.[2] Wen et al.[53] studied the mechanical proper-
ties of porous magnesium with a porosity of 35–55 % and
with the pore size of approximately 70–400 lm by compres-
sive tests. The results indicated that the Young’s modulus
and peak stress increases with a decrease in porosity and
pore size. The mechanical properties of the porous magne-
sium were in a range of those of cancellous bone.[53] Liu.[54]
fabricated lotus-type porous magnesium by metal/gas eutec-
B8 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
tic unidirectional solidification. This alloy has a regular
porous structure, which looks like lotus roots. It is found that
the lotus-type porous metals exhibit superior mechanical
properties than conventional porous metals produced by sin-
tering or foaming.[54] Appropriate choice of pore size can
significantly improve integration of the implant with natural
tissue.[11,55] Witte et al.[12] investigated a cartilage repair on an
open porous (75 % porosity) scaffold made of magnesium
alloy AZ91 used as a subchondral bone replacement. The
results showed that this alloy degraded too rapid in vivo to
allow sufficient cartilage repair above the scaffold during the
first 12 weeks. Usually, corrosion rate increases with the
increasing pore area. The only way for pores to increase cor-
rosion rate is based on the increasing contact area with the
corrosive solution.[56]
Thus, the first challenge for porous magnesium is to de-
crease the corrosion rate by reducing through pores. The sec-
ond challenge is that these pores in the materials will result in
a shorter fatigue life. Further options to be considered for a
better performance of magnesium scaffolds are the use of
other biocompatible Mg alloys or appropriate coatings.
HA Composites
HA is soluble in acidic solution, insoluble in alkaline solu-
tion, and slightly soluble in distilled water. Crystalline HA is
thermodynamically the most stable calcium phosphate in the
body fluid. HA reacts actively to proteins, lipids, and other
inorganic and organic materials.[2] The density of HA affects
the mechanical properties. The denser the material is, the
higher the strength improves. Based on this idea, several HA
reinforced biodegradable polymer composites have been
developed, such as HA/Polyhydroxybutyrate and HA/poly-
lactide.[2] In vitro experiments showed adding nanoapatite to
polyactiveTM greatly increases the ability of composites to
induce calcium phosphate precipitation.[2]
Witte et al.[57] investigated a metal matrix composite
(MMC) made of AZ91D as a matrix and HA particles as rein-
forcements in vitro for mechanical and corrosive properties.
Corrosion tests revealed that HA particles stabilised the cor-
rosion rate and exhibited more uniform corrosion attack in
artificial seawater and cell solutions. The stable phases of cal-
cium phosphate ceramics depend considerably on the tem-
perature and the presence of water.[2] CaCO3 was found on
MMC-HA surfaces after immersion in artificial seawater,
while no formation of CaCO3 was found after immersion in
cell solutions with and without proteins. This study testified
that biodegradable MMC-HA is a cytocompatible biomaterial
with adjustable mechanical and corrosive properties. The
HA/magnesium alloy composites offer one advantage that is
the possibility to control the degradation rate.
6.1.2. Suitable Coating
In order to improve the corrosion resistance, coating on
magnesium alloys is the most popular method. Surface treat-
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ments also influence the mechanical properties of the implant
alloy. The integration behavior can be influenced by structur-
al and morphological changes of the implant surface. There is
a challenge for corrosion scientists to create a coating on Mg
alloys in human body. It is essential for the coating to have
sufficient adhesion on magnesium, high hardness and me-
chanical strength, good toughness, environmental friendli-
ness, corrosion, fatigue and wear resistance. But, so far there
are no coatings that can satisfy all these demands. Metallic
coatings including electroless plating nickel, chromate con-
version coating and aluminum coating have higher hardness
and mechanical properties. But they are toxic or detrimental
to the human body. Non-metallic coatings comprise conver-
sation films, thermal spray coating, polymers and anodizing
etc.
Apatite Conversion Film
Amorphous calcium phosphate or magnesium calcium
apatite ((Ca1-xMgx) 10(PO4) 6(OH) 2) precipitation can form on
the surface of magnesium alloys with some alkaline chemical
agents. As a natural bone composition, HA is known to pos-
sess a low solubility in body environment. Abdullat et al.[58]
applied NaHCO3, NaCO3 and LiOH, respectively, to modify
the surface of magnesium. The results showed that only
NaHCO3 could modify surface of magnesium, suggested the
formation of magnesium containing b-TCP (Tricalcium phos-
phate Ca3 (PO4)2 = (whitlockite with low crystallinity (Ca,
Mg) 3(PO4)2)) and it improves the corrosion resistance in
Hank’s Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS). Kuwahara et al.[59]
used a heat treatment method to precipitate apatite on pure
magnesium surface in Hank’s solution, and gained a magne-
sium apatite (Ca 0.86 Mg 0.14) 10 (PO4) 6(OH) 2. but the mechan-
ical and corrosion properties of this coating were not given in
the literature. Li et al.[9] put pure magnesium in super saturat-
ed NaHCO3-MgCO3 solution, and then heat-treated the sam-
ples. The results showed that corrosion resistance of alkali-
heat-treated magnesium improved in both SBF and SBF (Cl-),
compared to the untreated magnesium samples. After im-
mersion in SBF for 14 days calcium-phosphate apatites were
detected on the treated samples. A further research[60]
revealed that alkali treated Mg samples have a cytotoxicity
effect, and lead to a significant cell morphological and cell
division changes. Whereas, there is no morphologcial altera-
tion of cells or inhibitory effect on cell growth and no cytotox-
icity on untreated Mg. Song[61] successfully electrodeposited a
HA coating on AZ91D. A coating consisted of dicalcium
phosphate dehydrate (CaHPO4·H2O) and b-tricalcium phos-
phate (Ca3(PO4)2) was obtained in an electrolyte solution con-
taining 0.1 L Ca(NO3)2, 0.06 L NH4H2PO4, H2O2 10 ml/L
and pH4.3, and then the as-deposited coating was shifted into
HA after soaking in 1 L NaOH solution for 2 h. It was dem-
onstrated that the HA coating can enhance the corrosion
resistance of AZ91D magnesium alloy in SBF. The in vivo cor-
rosion experiments by Witte[12] demonstrated biological cal-
cium phosphates were accumulated in the corrosion layer of
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008 © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
four magnesium alloy AZ31, AZ91, WE43 and LAE442.
Above studies demonstrated that apatite conversion film
would be a promising bioactive coating on magnesium
alloys.
Other Conversion Coatings
Conversion coatings are fabricated by chemical or electro-
chemical treatment of a metal surface to produce a superficial
layer of substrate metal oxides, chromates, phosphates or
other compounds that are chemically bonded to the sur-
face.[62] There are a number of various types of conversion
coatings such as chromate, phosphate-permanganate, stan-
nate and fluorine containing. Although chromate conversion
coatings have superior corrosion resistance to others, one of
the main disadvantages of them is the toxicity in treatment
and service. Thus, this coating cannot be applied in human
body. Phosphate-permanganate and stannate conversion
coatings are environmentally friendly and have shown good
corrosion resistance comparable to chromate coating. Han
et al.[63] developed a conversion coating with Mn3 (PO4)2,
which can heal by itself in salt solution. Gonzalez-Nunez
et al.[64] reported that a 2–3 lm thick crystalline coating of
MgSnO3 obtained with stannate treatments has a passivity
effect; details on the corrosion resistance were not given.[62]
Hassel et al.[65] reported that the MgF2 conversion film on
ZM21 under 4-point bending has good corrosion property,
despite the coating cracks partially in the plastic deformation
zones, because the crack valleys are refilled with an insolating
and dense Mg (OH)2 layer. However, Zeng et al.[66] found that
MgF2 conversion film on AZ31 alloy only slightly improve
corrosion resistance in 0.9 wt% NaCl solution. Gao[67] adopted
CeCl3 or Y(NO3)3 solutions to obtain rare earth conversion
films, which is consisted of Mg(OH)2, Ce2O3 and MgO or
Mg(OH)2, Y2O3 and MgO, respectively on pure Mg. The later
film has a better corrosion resistance than the former. But this
research is still in preliminary stage. Thus, the disadvantage
of the last four coatings is that they are very thin and soft,
cannot resist any mechanical damage and their protection
against corrosion is fairly limited.
Thermal Spray Coatings
Zhang et al.[68] adopted thermal spray to deposit alumi-
num film on AZ91. A heat treatment at a temperature of
450 °C was conducted in order to ensure adequate adhesion.
The b-phase formed in the interface of coating and matrix
due to the diffusion of magnesium and aluminum atoms.
Thus, this layer had an excellent anti-corrosion property and
anti-wear property. Chiu[69] investigated the corrosion resis-
tance of aluminum arc spray coating. It was found that this
coating alone was incapable of protection against corrosion
owing to the high porosity in the layer. After appropriate hot
pressing processes, the corrosion property was improved.
Unfortuantely, during corrosion process, the releasing alumi-
num ions from the Al coating have some negative effects on
http://www.aem-journal.com B9
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
human body. It is well recognised that TiO2, Al2O3 and ZrO
etc ceramics with good chemical and dimensional stability,
mechanical strength, and toughness are the acceptable bioma-
terials. Zeng et al.[70] obtained the TiO2 coating on magnesium
alloy AM60 with plasma spray technique. The corrosion resis-
tance of AM60 with TiO2 coating in Hank’s solution was not
improved compared to that of the alloy without the coating,
because of galvanic corrosion occurred between the sub-
strates and the porous coating. The corrosion rate of the same
coating after sealing with sodium silicate was significantly
reduced. The advantage of the thermal spray technique is that
coatings on Mg alloys have rough surfaces with high porosi-
ty, poor adhesion to the substrate. The disadvantage is that
the porous coating can be favourable for being propitious to
the growth of the soft tissue and filling with eluting drugs or
other coatings.Xin et al.[71–72] employed a plasma-based tech-
nique, i.e. cathodic arc process to develop two bilayered coat-
ings such as 1 lm thick Al2O3/Al and 1.5 lm thick ZrO2/Zr
on magnesium alloy AZ91 successfully. The intermediate
layer Al or Zr was utilized to block direct contact between
oxygen and magnesium and thus to enhance the bondig
strength of the coatings with the substrate materials. The
results indeed exhibit these coatings have good adhensive
strength with base material and improve the corrosion resis-
tance. However, the electrolyte penetration deteriorated the
protection of the coatings significantly after a long exposure
in SBF due to the existing pores in the coatings. It is found
that the coatings obtained with cathodic arc process are den-
ser and have flater surfaces as well as better adhension
strength to the mother material compared with one with the
plasma spray technique. There exists a comon shortcoming
that the ceramic coated films, fabricated by plasma tech-
niques, without additional sealing will deteriorate the corro-
sion property if soaked in SBF for a long time. In addition, the
plasma technology has the health and safety issues generated
by the production of dust, fumes, and noise and light radia-
tion during treatment.
Organic Polymer Coatings
Organic coating is typically applied in the final stages of a
coating process. Organic coating systems can include a vari-
ety of different processes that make use of organic polymers,
such as painting, powder coating. The paintings are based on
following resins: acrylic, alkyd, butyrate, cellulose acetate,
chlorinated polyether, epoxy, fluorocarbons, nitrocellulose,
nylon, polyester, polyethylene, polypropylene, polyur-
ethanes, rubber resin, silicone and vinyl.[64]
To achieve protection, a coating must adhere to the magne-
sium, and for this purpose the magnesium surface should be
completely clean, free of contamination and dry. The pres-
ence of moisture and entrapped air could lead to the forma-
tion of pinholes or blister in the coating during the curing
process. The challenge for coatings on magnesium alloys is to
find an appropriate primer. The primer has to improve the
adhesion between magnesium and topcoat, and posses the
B10 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
self-healing property in case of physical damage. For this
function, the primer coating on steels usually contain inhibit-
ing pigments (red lead, zinc chromate, metallic lead and zinc
dust) and other pigments (red oxide/iron oxide, micaceous
iron oxide and aluminum) and lamellar pigments such as
stainless steel, which cannot be applied on magnesium due to
their more positive potentials compared to magnesium. And
not to mention of application in human body, most of these
metallic ions are toxic or detrimental to the body. Some com-
position of the binders and almost all organic solvents of the
paints are also poisonous to human beings. For example,
coat-tar can result in cancer of skin. The curing agent for aro-
ma amidocyanogen epoxy is the potential cause of function
damage of liver and kidney.[73]
Recently, Huang[74] applied dipping technology to prepare
degradable poly(lactic acid) coatings on pure Mg implant on
which a silane coupling agent was first coated in order to im-
prove adhesion strength between Mg samples and poly lactic
acid. It is recognized that poly (DL-lactide-co-glycolide)
(PLGA) with relative molecular mass of 200,000 has been
used in medical application due to its good blood compatibil-
ity. The preliminary result showed that the coating can offer
an effective protection against corrosion, dependent on an ob-
vious reduction in mass loss of PLGA coating on pure Mg in
Hank’s solutions. This polymer coating may be a good choice
for degradable implants. But it could not provide sufficient
protection for a bone replacement. Thus, it is still crucial to
seek a potential polymer coating suitable for the permanent
implants. The final challenge for polymer may be the degrad-
ability and develop huge cells resulted from the wear debris.
Anodizing Coating
Anodizing or microarc oxidation (MAO) is an electrolytic
process for producing a stable oxide film on metals and
alloys. The structure of this coating is characterized by porous
oxide film, and finally needs to be sealed with organic or
other coatings. Anodized coating is corrosion and wear resis-
tant. Since anodized magnesium alloys are generally de-
signed to be sealed or covered by other protective layers,
testing in most cases was not performed on anodized
surfaces itself, but on the layer systems build up on anod-
ized layers.[75] Thus, it is very difficulty to evaluate the cor-
rosion properties of the anodizing coating itself. Zhang[76]
studied the corrosion and wear resistance of AZ91D Mg
alloy with and without MAO coating, which is mainly com-
posed of d-MgAl28O40, b-MgSiO4, (Mg4Al4)(Al4Si2)O20 and
Mg3Al2Si3O12 sharp spinel, in Hank’s solution. The results
showed that both corrosion and wear resistance of AZ91D
alloy in the Hank’s solution is obviously improved after
MAO in comparison with that of untreated AZ91D alloy. The
immersion test results show the mass loss of untreated
AZ91D alloy is 15 times of that of MAO ones. And the electro-
chemical corrosion experiments show that the corrosion po-
tential of Mg alloy is improved from –1.5786 V to –0.43019 V
by MAO surface treatment, the corrosion current is reduced
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
from 0.028703 A/cm2 to 2.0456 × 10–7 A/cm2. The lubricate
sliding wear test results exhibited the mass loss of untreated
AZ91D Mg is one and a half times of that of MAO ones.
Above results reveal that magnesium alloys with MAO
have either good corrosion resistance or better wear resis-
tance . It may be not the case, if a test is performed in the com-
bination and interaction of corrosion and wear environment.
A recent study, which was made by Chen[45] on Mg alloy
AZ91 with MAO coating in 0.9 % NaCl, 0.9 % NaCl +0.35 g/L
NaHCO3 and 0.9 % NaCl +0.7 g/L NaHCO3 solutions and
shows a different result of wear resistance by means of
Micro-abrasive wear tests. Despite MAO coating improving
the corrosion resistance of Mg alloy AZ91, the wear resistance
of AZ91 with MAO coating decreased due to the formation of
the wear debris resulting from the brittle MAO coating, com-
pared with the substrate alloy. Thus, it is imperative to
further evaluate the anti-wear property of MAO coating on
Mg alloys through various wear tests. In other study, Song[27]
found no detectable hydrogen evolution from the anodized
commercial pure magnesium measured in Hank’s solution
for one month. This implies that MAO coating did success-
fully delay the biodegradation of the substrates magnesium.
One of the main challenge for producing adherent, corro-
sion resistant, anodic coatings on magnesium results from the
electrochemical inhomogeneity owing to the phase separation
in the alloy.[56] Under some circumstances, such galvanic cor-
rosion between the modified surface and the underlying sub-
strate can manifest itself in a highly detrimental fashion,
whereby blister formation takes place.
Another challenge is the adverse influence of anodic coat-
ings on fatigue performance of magnesium alloys,[77–78]
Mg-2 %Al-1 %Zn,[579] and WE43-T6.[80] Reduction in fatigue
strength of anodized metals usually resulted from oxidation-
induced surface tensile stress, structural defects in the oxide
layer and the substrate ‘age softening due to the heat asso-
ciated with oxide film formation.[77] However, some re-
searches[81] claim that there is no apparent difference between
anodized and non-anodized surfaces, except that the scatter-
ing range of data is slightly different. Thus, the current
fatigue data of anodized coatings are contradictory. The main
reason is that fatigue properties are influenced by many fac-
tors including defects within the base material itself, the
stress between coating and substrate, and quality of coating
etc, beside the load factors such as frequencies, load ratios,
machine types. Particularly, for cast magnesium alloys, the
pores existed in the microstructure have more significant
effect on fatigue properties. The size and distribution of pores
result in the scattering data. In this situation, it is very diffi-
cult to evaluate the impact of the coating alone on fatigue per-
formance.
6.1.3. Diffusion Bonding
Because Ti, Zr and Mg alloys are considered to be biocom-
patible, Duygulu et al[82] employed diffusion bonding tech-
nique by vaccum hot pressing to bond pure zirconium and
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008 © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
Ti6Al4V alloy to pure Mg, AM60 and AZ31 alloys. It is dem-
onstrated that direct diffusion bonding of Mg alloys to Ti
alloys seems impossible due to free of mutual solubility or no
intermetallic compound formation resulting from the great
difference between the melting points of these alloys. It is
suggested that an indirect diffusion bonding method such
that an additional agent (i.e. Zr) utlized between Mg and Ti
forms a sandwich may be possible.
6.2. Surface Modification
6.2.1. Ion Plating
Zhang[83] applied ion plating to obtain a dense and well-
adhered Ti coating on pure magnesium. The free corrosion
potential (Ecorr) of the Ti-coated magnesium increased
0.331 V (versus SCE), compared with Ecorr (–1.638 V) of
the uncoated magnesium in 0.9 wt % NaCl solution. The
corrosion current density of the Ti-coated magnesium
is 2.05 × 10–5 A/cm2, approximately one order of magni-
tude lower than that of the uncoated magnesium
(1.45 × 10–4 A/cm2). This result implies that Ti-coating can
improve the corrosion resistance of magnesium in SBFs.
Moreover, Zhang[83] found that the titanium content gradual-
ly increases from the Mg-substrate side through the interface
to the Ti-coated side, showing that an interdiffusion layer
was formed at the interface between the Ti-coating and the
magnesium substrate. It is noteworthily that this result is not
accordant with the investigation by Duygulu[82] on diffusion
bonding of Ti and Mg alloys.
6.2.2. Ion Implantation
Liu[84] studied the corrosion behavior of surgical AZ91
magnesium alloy by titanium ion implantation. The results
disclose that an intermixed layer is produced and the surface
oxidized films are mainly composed of titanium oxide with a
lesser amount of magnesium oxide. X-ray photoelectron spec-
troscopy (XPS) reveals that the oxide has three layers. The
10 nm-thick outer layer is mainly composed of MgO and
TiO2 with some Mg (OH)2. The 50 nm-thick middle layer pre-
dominantly consists of TiO2 and MgO with minor contribu-
tions from MgAl2O4 and TiO. The third layer from the surface
is rich in metallic Mg, Ti, Al, and Ti3Al. The electrochemical
experimental results show that compared to the unimplanted
AZ91 alloy, titanium ion implantation significantly shifts the
open circuit potential (OCP) to a more positive potential and
improves the corrosion resistance at OCP in SBF at 37 ± 1 °C.
This phenomenon can be ascribed to the more compact sur-
face oxide film, enhanced reoxidation on the implanted sur-
face, as well as the increased Mg17Al12 phase. It should be
pointed out that the authors did not reveal the microstructure
of the implanted layer and the bonding with the substrate.
It is not always the case that ion implanted coating im-
proves the corrosion resistance. Wan[85] prepared a zinc coat-
http://www.aem-journal.com B11
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
ing on Mg-Ca alloys by means of ion implantation at a dose
of 0.9 × 1017 ions/cm2. It is out of the expectation, all zinc-im-
planted alloys show lower corrosion resistance than their
unimplated counterparts. It is hereby suggested that zinc is
not a favarable element for the ion implantation of biomedical
Mg-Ca alloys.
6.2.3. Surface Cladding and Melting with Laser or Electron Beam
The surfaces of magnesium alloys can be modified by
using high-density energy techniques such as laser beam and
electron beam. A finer microstructure on the surface can be
obtained. Laser cladding and laser surface melting are advan-
tageous processes for selective improvement of the corrosion
resistance of magnesium alloys. Laser cladding of aluminum
layers increases the corrosion resistance of magnesium in
NaCl solutions.[85] A laser cladding of Al-Si eutectic alloy onto
AS41 magnesium alloy and its composite with C-short fibers
was reported.[87] The corrosion rate of the clad coating is
about 100 times lower than that of the Mg substrates. Hao
et al.[88] used the high current pulsed electron beam to treat
AZ91HP and the results showed a substantial potential for
the improvement of corrosion resistance. Now there is no
available fatigue data of this technique.
6.2.4. Mechanical Treatments
Surface of magnesium alloys can be modified by mechani-
cal treatments such as deep rolling, shot peening, and roller-
burnishing.[89] The experimental results demonstrated that
the process-induced residual compressive stresses could
overcompensate the detrimental effect of surface roughness
since the fatigue life of shot peened specimens is higher than
that of the electro-polished reference. Particularly, fatigue life
extension by retardation of microcrack growth due to the
residual compressive stress field is greater than the reduction
in fatigue life caused by earlier crack nucleation. The rough
surface may be beneficial for tissue growth. It is, however,
unknown whether the corrosion and corrosion fatigue behav-
ior of these alloys treated by mechanical treatments are better
or worse. Here it should be noted that these surface modifica-
tion is currently not aimed to apply in implanted materials.
Therefore, it is essential to investigate further the possible
application in body environment.
7. Outlook
Magnesium alloys as biodegradable metal stents have
been in clinical trials and will be a promising replacement for
current implant materials in orthopedic and trauma surgery.
An initial study on MMC/HA exhibited the possibility to de-
velop a cytocompatible biomaterial with adjustable mechani-
cal and corrosive properties. The fundamental properties of
an appropriate bioactive coating with multilayer are expected
to provide good corrosion, fatigue and wear resistance. Final-
B12 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ly, these substitutes may be designed to satisfy each individu-
al requirement for life.
Received: February 11, 2008
Final version: May 27, 2008
Published online: July 14, 2008
–
[1] R. V. Marrey, R. Burgermeister, R. B. Grishaber, R. O.
Ritchie, Biomaterials 2006, 27, 1988.
[2] D. Shi, Biomaterials and Tissue Eng., Heidelberg, Springer
2004.
[3] D. Upadhyay, M. A. Panchal, R. S. Dubey, V. K. Srivas-
tava, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2006, 432, 1.
[4] P. A. Dearnley, Surf. Coating Technol. 2005, 198, 483.
[5] N. L. Saris, E. Mervaala, H. Karppanen, J. A. Khawaja,
A. Lewenstam, Clinica Chim. Acta 2000, 294, 1.
[6] Dietary Ref. Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magn. Vita-
min D, and fluoride, National Academy Press, Washing-
ton 1997, 190.
[7] R. K. Rude, H. E. Gruber, L. Y. Wei, A. Frausto, B. G.
Mills, Calcif Tissue Int. 2003, 72, 32.
[8] D. Williams, Med. Device Technol. 2006, 17, 9.
[9] L. C. Li, J. C. Gao, Y. Wang, Surf. Coating Technol. 2004,
185, 92.
[10] A. Lambotte, Bull. Mém. Soc. Nat. Chir. 1932, 28, 1325.
[11] M. P. Staiger, A. M. Pietak, J. Huadmai, G. Dias, Bioma-
terials 2006, 27, 1728.
[12] F. Witte, J. Reifenrath, P. P. Mueller, H. A. Crostack,
J. Nellesen, F. W. Bach, D. Bormann, M. Rudert, Mat.-
wiss. u. Werkstofftech. 2006, 37, 504.
[13] F. Witte, V. Kaese, H. Haferkamp, E. Switzer, A. Meyer-
Lindenberg, C. J. Wirth, H. Windhagen, Biomaterials
2005, 26, 3557.
[14] G. D. Zhang, J. J. Huang, K. Yang, B. C. Yang, H. J. Ai,
Acta Metall. Sinica 2007, 43, 1186.
[15] O. Duygulu, R. A. Kaya, G. Oktay, A. A. Kaya, Mater.
Sci. Forum 2007, 546–549, 421.
[16] G. C. Clark, D. F. Williams, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 1982,
16, 125.
[17] M. G. Fontana, Corros. Eng. McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, New York 1987, 28.
[18] B. Craige, S. L. Pohlman, in Met. Handbook, 13, Corro-
sion, ASM Intl, Ohio 1987, 79.
[19] G. L. Song, Adv. Eng. Mater. 2005, 7, 563.
[20] R. C. Zeng, J. Zhang, W. J. Huang, W. Dietzel, K. U.
Kainer, C. Blawert, K. Wei, Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc.
China 2006, 16, s763.
[21] F. Witte, J. Fischer, J. Nellesen, H. A. Crostack, V. Kaese,
A. Pisch, F. Beckamann, H. Windhagen, Biomaterials
2006, 27, 1013.
[22] H. Mayer, H. Lipowsky, M. Papakyriacou, R. Rösch,
A. Stich, B. Zettl, S. S. Tschegg, in Proc 7th Int Fatigue
Congress Higher Education Press, Beijing 1999, 2059.
[23] G. Eisenmeier, M. Ottmueller, H. W. Hoeppel,
H. Mughrabi, in Proc 7th Int Fatigue Congress, Higher
Education Press, Beijing 1999, 253.
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008
Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
[24] A. Stich, H. G. Haldenwanger, in Magn. 2000, Proc. of
the Sec. Israeli Int. Conf. on Magn. Sci. & Technol. Magne-
sium Research Institute LTD, Beer-Sheva 2000, 31.
[25] W. J. Huang, B. Hou, Y. X. Pang, Z. R. Zhou, Wear 2006,
260, 1173.
[26] G. Govender, J. H. Ferreira in Magn. 2000, Proc. of the
Sec. Israeli Int. Conf. on Magn. Sci. & Technol. Magnesium
Research Institute LTD, Beer-Sheva 2000, 371.
[27] G. Song, Corros. Sci. 2007, 49, 1696.
[28] G. Song, A. Atrens, Adv. Eng. Mater. 1999, 1, 11.
[29] W. D. Mueller, M. L. Nascimento, M. Zeddies, M. Cor-
sico, L. M. Gassa, M. A. F. Lorenzo de Mele, Mater. Res.
2007, 10, 5.
[30] R. C. Zeng, W. Ke, Y. B. Xu, E. H. Han, Acta Metall. Sini-
ca 2001, 37, 673.
[31] G. Wu, Y. Fan, H. Gao, C. Zhai, Y. P. Zhu, Mater. Sci.
Eng A 2005, 408, 255.
[32] M. Bobby Kannan, R. K. Singh Raman, Biomaterials
2008, 29, 2306.
[33] Z. J. Li, X. N. Gu, S. Q. Lou, Y. F. Zheng, Biomaterials,
2008, 29, 1329.
[34] F. Hehmann, F. Sommer, H. Jones, R. G. J. Edyvean,
J. Mater. Sci. 1989, 24, 2369.
[35] G. L. Makar, J. Kruger, K. Sieradzki, Corros. Sci. 1993,
34, 1311.
[36] R. Zeng, E. Han, W. Ke, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2007, 23,
363.
[37] C. L. Liu, Y. C. Xin, G. Y. Tang, P. K. Chu, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2007, 456, 350.
[38] C. L. Liu, Y. C. Xin, X. B. Tian, P. K. Chu, J. Mater. Res.
2007, 22, 1806.
[39] W. D. Mueller, M. L. Nascimento, M. Zeddies, M. Cor-
sico, L. M. Gassa, M. A. F. Lorenzo de Mele, Mater. Res.
2007, 10, 5.
[40] A. Froats, T. K. Aune, D. Hawke, W. Unsworth, J. Hillis,
In Metals Handbook, 13 Corrosion, ASM Intl, Ohio 1987,
740.
[41] R. Ambat, N. N. Aung, W. Zhou, Corros. Sci. 2000, 42,
1433.
[42] R. C. Zeng, W. Q. Zhou, E. H. Han, W. Ke, Acta Metall.
Sinica 2005, 41, 307.
[43] J. Black, Biol. Performance of Mater.-Fundamentals of Bio-
compatib. 3rd Edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York
1999, 18.
[44] L. P. Xu, E. L. Zhang, D. S.Yin, J. Mater. Sci: Mater. Med.
2008, 19, 1017.
[45] J. Chen, R. C. Zeng, J. Wang, MRS Int. Mater. Res. Conf.
(IMRC 2008). (To be submitted).
[46] R. C. Zeng, J. Chen, W. Ke, E. H. Han, W. Dietzel, Trans.
Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2007, 17, s193.
[47] P. Erne, M. Schier, T. J. Resink, Cardiovasc Intervent Radi-
ol 2006, 29, 11.
[48] R. Waksman, R. Pakala, P. K. Kuchulakanti, R. Baffour,
D. Hellinga, R. Seabron, F. O. Tio, E. Wittchow, S. Hart-
wig, C. Harder, R. Rohde, K. H. Waldmann, A. Haver-
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008 © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
ich, Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2006,
68, 607.
[49] B. Heublein, R. Rohde, V. Kaese, V. Niemeyer, W. Har-
tung, A. Haverich, Heart 2003, 89, 651.
[50] P. Zartner, R. Cesnjevar, H. Singer, M. Weyand, Cathe-
terization & Cardiovascular Interventions 2005, 66, 590.
[51] L. Gruberg, www.medscape.com/viewarticle/482887.
[52] K. Hotz, A. Murphy, www.eurekalert.org/ pub_re-
leases/2006-03/acoc-daa031206.php
[53] C. E. Wen, Y. Yamada, K. Shimojima, Y. Chino, H. Hos-
okawa, M. Mabuchi, Mater. Lett. 2004, 58, 357.
[54] Y. Liu, Y. X. Li, J. Wan, H. W. Zhang, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
2005, 402, 47.
[55] V. Karageorgiou, D. Kaplan, Biomaterials 2005, 26, 5474.
[56] T. K. Aune, in Proc. of 40th Wld Magn. Conf. IMA, Toron-
to 1983, 52.
[57] F. Witte, F. Feyerabend, P. Maier, J. Fischer, M. Stoer-
mer, C. Blawert, W. Dietzel, N. Hort, Biomaterials 2007,
28, 2163.
[58] Y. A. Abdullat, S. Tsutsumi, N. Nakajima, M. Ohta,
H. Kuwahara, K. Ikeuchi, Mater. Trans. 2001, 42, 1777.
[59] H. Kuwahara, Y. A. Abdullat, N. Mazaki, S. Tsutsumi,
T. Aizawa, Mater. Trans. 2001, 42, 1317.
[60] L. Qiao, J. C. Gao, Y. Wang, S. Wang, S. Wu, Y. Xue,
Mater. Sci. Forum 2007, 546–549, 459.
[61] Y. W. Song, D. Y. Shan, E. H. Han, Mater. Lett. 2008, 62,
3276.
[62] J. E. Gray, B. Luan, J. Alloys Compd. 2002, 336, 88.
[63] E. H. Han, W. Q. Zhou, D. Y. Shan, W. Ke, Mater. Sci.
Forum 2003, 419–422, 879.
[64] M. A. Gonzalez-Nunez, C. A. Nunez-Lopez, P. Skel-
don, G. E. Thompson, H. Karimzadeh, P. Lyon, T. E.
Wilks, Corros. Sci. 1995, 37, 1763.
[65] T. Hassel, F. W. Bach, C. Krause, P. Wilk, in Magn. Tech-
nol. 2005, TMS, San Francisco, 2005, 485.
[66] R. C. Zeng, J. Chen, W. Dietzel, N. Hort, K. U. Kainer,
Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2007, 17, s166.
[67] J. C. Gao, Y. Xue, L. Y. Qiao, Y. Wang, Y. Zhang, Mater.
Sci. Forum 2007, 546–549, 601.
[68] J. Zhang, Y. Wang, R. C. Zeng, W. J. Huang, Mater. Sci.
Forum 2007, 546–549, 529.
[69] L. H. Chiu, H. A. Lin, C. C. Chen, C. F. Yang, C. H.
Chang, J. C. Wu, Mater. Sci. Forum 2003, 419–422, 909.
[70] R. C. Zeng, W. Dietzel, J. Chen, W. J. Huang, J. Wang,
Key Eng. Mater. 2008, 373–374, 609.
[71] Y. C. Xin, C. L. Liu, W. J. Zhang, J. Jiang, G. Y. Tang,
X. B. Tian, P. K. Chu, J. Electrochem. Soc. 2008, 155, c178.
[72] Y. C. Xin, C. L. Liu, W. J. Zhang, K. F. Huo, G. Y. Tang,
P. K. Chu, J. Mater. Res. 2008, 23, 312.
[73] I. Walker, Corros. Prevention and Control 1997, 44, 64.
[74] J. J. Huang, Y. B. Ren, B. C. Zhang, K. Yang, The Chinese
J. Nonferrous Met. 2007, 17, 1465.
[75] C. Blawert, W. Dietzel, E. Ghali, G. L. Song, Adv. Eng.
Mater. 2006, 8, 511.
http://www.aem-journal.com B13
 Zeng et al./Progress and Challenge for Magnesium Alloys as Biomaterials
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS
[76] X. P. Zhang, Z. P. Zhao, F. M. Wu, Y. L. Wang, J. Wu,
J. Mater Sci. 2007, 42, 8523.
[77] V. V. Ogarevic, R. I. Stephens, Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci.
1990, 20, 141.
[78] N. M. Gringberg, Int. J. Fatigue 1982, 4, 83.
[79] A. L. Yerokhin, A. Shatrov, V. Samsonov, P. Shashkov,
A. Leyland, A. Matthews, Surf. Coat. Technol. 2004, 182,
78.
[80] A. J. Eifert, J. P. Thomas, Scr. Mater. 1999, 40, 929.
[81] T. Kanadani, A. Saijo, M. Hino, K. Saki, J. Jpn. Inst. Light
Metals 2002, 52, 477.
[82] O. Duygulu, A. A. Kaya, G. Oktay, F. C. Sahin, Mater.
Sci. Forum 2007, 546–549, 417.
[83] E. L. Zhang, L. P. Xu, K. Yang, Scr. Mater. 2005, 53, 523.
[84] C. L. Liu, Y. C. Xin, X. B. Tian, J. Zhao, P. K. Chu, J. Vac.
Sci. Technol. A 2007, 25, 334.
______________________
B14 http://www.aem-journal.com © 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
[85] Y. Z. Wan, G. Y. Xiong, H. L. Luo, F. He, Y. Huang,
Y. L. Wang, Appl. Surf. Sci. 2008, DOI: 10.1016/j.ap-
susc.2008./02.117.
[86] R. Subramanian, S. Sircar, J. Mazumder, J. Mater. Sci.
1991, 26, 951.
[87] V. Neubert, A. Bakkar, C.A. Huang, in Proc. of the 7th
Int. Conf. on Magn. Alloys and their Appl. Wiley-VCH,
Weinheim 2006, 842.
[88] S. Z. Hao, B. Gao, A. Wu, J. X. Zou, Y. Qin, C. Dong,
J. An, Q. F. Guan, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. in Phys. Res. B
2005, 240, 646.
[89] L. Wagner, M. Hilpert, J. Wendt, B. Kuester, Mater. Sci.
Forum 2003, 419–422, 93.
ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS 2008