Scie-review

Smart Polymer Coatings at the Nanoscale: Engineering Dynamic Interfaces for Next-Generation Biomedical Implants

Editor | 39 min read | AIH | Jan 6, 2026
📖 24 reads ❤️ 1 likes
Share:
ScieBeta Scie-Review 🔓 Open Access
⚠️ AI Disclosure: This Scie-Review was generated using AI-assisted synthesis of peer-reviewed literature and requires expert verification.
SRID: SRID-01-2026-38AD3E
Authors: ScieBeta Editorial Team
📖 5,129 words 📚 99 references 📅 January 6, 2026
Mini Review Style: Academic

Smart Polymer Coatings at the Nanoscale: Engineering Dynamic Interfaces for Next-Generation Biomedical Implants

Abstract

Biomedical implants, while indispensable in modern medicine, are frequently limited by issues such as infection, foreign body response, inadequate tissue integration, and mechanical degradation. Addressing these challenges necessitates a paradigm shift from passive, inert implant surfaces to dynamic, responsive interfaces. Smart polymer coatings, precisely engineered at the nanoscale, represent a transformative approach in this regard. This review synthesizes current advancements in the design, synthesis, characterization, and application of such coatings, highlighting their capacity to respond to specific biological stimuli, thereby actively modulating the implant-host interface 1. We delve into the sophisticated mechanisms by which these intelligent materials can trigger on-demand drug release, exhibit antimicrobial activity, promote desired cellular behaviors, and self-heal, fundamentally enhancing implant longevity and efficacy 2,13,30. Critical insights are provided into the structure-property relationships governing these nanoscale systems, alongside a rigorous evaluation of the diverse synthetic methodologies and advanced characterization techniques employed to probe their complex behaviors 3,5,17. Furthermore, we critically assess the current limitations, translational hurdles, and unresolved controversies, emphasizing the need for robust predictive models and standardized in vivo validation. The review concludes by outlining future research trajectories, envisioning a future where autonomous, adaptive implants seamlessly integrate with the physiological environment, ushering in an era of truly personalized and performant medical devices.

Introduction: The Imperative for Dynamic Implant Interfaces

The success of biomedical implants, ranging from orthopedic prostheses and cardiovascular stents to dental devices and neural interfaces, hinges critically on their long-term performance within the complex physiological environment 1. Despite decades of remarkable progress in biomaterials science, contemporary implants often face significant challenges that compromise their efficacy and patient outcomes. These include persistent risks of infection, which remain a leading cause of implant failure and necessitate costly revision surgeries 2,28,30. The host’s foreign body response, characterized by chronic inflammation and fibrous encapsulation, can impede functional integration and lead to implant rejection 1. Moreover, mechanical wear, corrosion, and material fatigue can limit the lifespan of metallic or ceramic components, while the inability of inert surfaces to actively promote tissue regeneration or respond to dynamic pathological conditions represents a fundamental limitation 11,12,16,32.

Traditional biomaterials have largely focused on achieving “biocompatibility” through inertness or passive bioactivity. However, the biological milieu is inherently dynamic, characterized by fluctuating pH, temperature, enzymatic activity, redox potentials, and the presence of various signaling molecules 40. A truly optimal implant interface, therefore, should not merely tolerate the biological environment but actively engage with it, sensing changes and responding intelligently to maintain homeostasis, mitigate adverse events, and facilitate therapeutic interventions 76. This recognition has spurred intense research into “smart” or “stimuli-responsive” materials, particularly polymers, which possess the unique ability to undergo reversible or irreversible changes in their physical or chemical properties in response to external cues 2,40. When these smart polymers are engineered into coatings at the nanoscale, they unlock an unprecedented level of control over surface-cell interactions and localized therapeutic delivery, thereby advancing the performance of biomedical implants 1,40.

The nanoscale dimension is paramount in this context for several reasons. Biological processes, from protein adsorption to cellular signaling, occur predominantly at interfaces measured in nanometers 1. By tailoring coating thickness, topography, and chemical heterogeneity at this scale, researchers can precisely dictate how proteins interact with the surface, influencing subsequent cellular adhesion, differentiation, and tissue integration 1,35. Nanoscale features can mimic the extracellular matrix, providing topographical cues that guide cell behavior and promote desired tissue regeneration 90. Furthermore, the high surface-to-volume ratio characteristic of nanomaterials enhances the loading efficiency of therapeutic agents and allows for their controlled, sustained, or on-demand release with exquisite spatial and temporal precision 50,51,56,64,67,69,75,78,80,81,83,89,91,93. The reduced diffusion distances at the nanoscale also facilitate faster response times for stimuli-responsive elements 4.

The concept of “smartness” in polymer coatings for biomedical implants encompasses a broad spectrum of functionalities. These include the ability to release antimicrobial agents upon detecting bacterial colonization, to deliver anti-inflammatory drugs in response to localized inflammation, to change surface wettability to prevent biofilm formation, or even to self-heal minor damage to extend implant longevity 2,13,19,30,42. Such dynamic capabilities represent a significant leap beyond static, passive surfaces, promising to mitigate many of the long-standing issues associated with implant failure. The integration of advanced sensing elements, such as carbon quantum dots, further expands the potential for real-time diagnostics and closed-loop therapeutic systems 9.

The scope of this review is to provide a critical, expert-level synthesis of the current landscape of smart polymer coatings at the nanoscale for biomedical implants. We will move beyond a mere summary of individual studies, instead focusing on the underlying chemical principles, synthetic strategies, and characterization insights that drive this field. The discussion will emphasize the intricate interplay between molecular structure and macroscopic function, highlighting the mechanisms through which these coatings confer their “smart” properties. We will also address the significant challenges that remain, including issues of long-term stability, immunogenicity, scalability, and regulatory pathways, while outlining promising future directions that could ultimately lead to the widespread clinical translation of truly adaptive and regenerative implant technologies. The field is rapidly evolving, with a strong emphasis on integrating multiple functionalities into single coating systems to achieve synergistic effects, moving towards a future of highly personalized and responsive implant therapies 1,76.

Architectural Design and Mechanistic Principles of Nanoscale Smart Polymer Coatings

The design and function of smart polymer coatings at the nanoscale are inextricably linked to their architectural complexity and the fundamental mechanistic principles governing their responsiveness. Achieving precise control over the implant-host interface requires a deep understanding of how polymer chemistry translates into dynamic behavior under specific biological cues. This section delineates the core stimuli-responsive mechanisms, the critical role of engineering the nano-bio interface, and the considerations for maintaining mechanical and structural integrity at these dimensions.

Stimuli-Responsiveness: Tailoring On-Demand Functionality

The hallmark of smart polymer coatings is their ability to undergo a significant, often reversible, change in properties (e.g., solubility, wettability, permeability, shape, drug release rate) in response to a specific environmental stimulus 40. For biomedical implants, these stimuli are typically chosen to reflect physiological conditions or pathological indicators, enabling an “on-demand” therapeutic or protective response.

Temperature-responsive polymers are among the most extensively studied smart materials. Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) (PNIPAM) is a quintessential example, exhibiting a lower critical solution temperature (LCST) around 32 °C in aqueous solutions 40. Below its LCST, PNIPAM is hydrophilic and swollen; above it, it becomes hydrophobic and collapses, expelling water and any encapsulated cargo. Coating implant surfaces with nanoscale PNIPAM films allows for temperature-triggered changes in surface wettability, protein adsorption, or controlled drug release. For instance, a PNIPAM coating could be designed to release an anti-inflammatory drug locally as the temperature rises due during an infection or inflammatory response, although precise temperature control in an implant site can be challenging. The transition can also be exploited for cell sheet engineering, where cells cultured on PNIPAM surfaces can be harvested non-enzymatically by lowering the temperature 40.

pH-responsive polymers are particularly relevant for biomedical applications, as pH variations are common indicators of physiological changes, such as inflammation, infection, or tumor microenvironments 30. Polymers containing weak acidic (e.g., carboxylic acids) or weak basic (e.g., amines) groups can ionize or deionize in response to pH fluctuations, leading to changes in their charge density, swelling behavior, and conformation. For example, coatings incorporating poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles with pH-responsive polymeric surfactants have been developed to enhance anticorrosion and antibacterial performance of magnesium implants 30. These systems can be designed to release antimicrobial agents in acidic environments characteristic of bacterial infections, or antacids to counteract local pH drops that accelerate corrosion of certain metallic implants 30,32. The ability to selectively respond to pathological pH ranges offers a powerful strategy for targeted therapy and implant protection.

Beyond temperature and pH, other stimuli-responsive mechanisms are being actively explored. Redox-responsive polymers, for instance, contain disulfide bonds or other moieties that can be cleaved or formed under reducing or oxidizing conditions, respectively. These systems are promising for intracellular drug delivery or for responding to oxidative stress conditions at implant sites. Light-responsive polymers, often incorporating photochromic units, can undergo conformational changes or bond cleavage upon irradiation with specific wavelengths of light. While external light sources limit their application for deeply implanted devices, they hold promise for superficial implants or those accessible via endoscopic procedures. Enzyme-responsive polymers are highly specific, designed to degrade or release cargo in the presence of particular enzymes upregulated during disease states (e.g., matrix metalloproteinases in inflammation or cancer). This specificity offers exquisite control over drug delivery, although the complexity of enzyme activity in vivo can present challenges. Electroactive polymers, including intrinsically conductive polymers or those incorporating conductive nanomaterials, can change their properties (e.g., conductivity, volume) in response to an electrical potential 25,49. These are particularly interesting for neural interfaces or for stimulating tissue regeneration, as electrical signals play a crucial role in many biological processes 63,82.

The current frontier lies in developing multi-stimuli responsive systems, where coatings can integrate responses to two or more independent stimuli. This allows for more sophisticated and robust control, potentially enabling a “logic gate” type of response where a therapeutic action is only initiated when multiple pathological indicators are present. However, designing such systems without unwanted cross-talk between different responsive elements remains a significant challenge 76.

Engineering the Nano-Bio Interface: Surface Chemistry and Topography

The immediate environment surrounding an implant is defined by its surface. Engineering this nano-bio interface is critical for dictating protein adsorption, cellular interactions, and ultimately, implant integration or rejection 1. Surface wettability, characterized by the contact angle, plays a fundamental role in these interactions 5. Coatings can be designed to be superhydrophobic, mimicking natural surfaces that resist water and protein adhesion, thereby preventing bacterial colonization and biofilm formation 19. Conversely, superhydrophilic surfaces can create a “hydration layer” that repels proteins and cells, offering excellent antifouling properties 14. The ability to dynamically switch between these states in response to a stimulus would be highly advantageous. For example, a coating could maintain a hydrophilic, antifouling state until a bacterial challenge is detected, then switch to a hydrophobic state to release an encapsulated antimicrobial agent. The precise control over surface energy and topography at the nanoscale, as characterized by techniques like contact angle goniometry 5 or atomic force microscopy 15, is crucial for these designs.

Biomimetic designs, which aim to replicate the structural and chemical complexity of natural biological surfaces, are gaining prominence 35,90. This involves creating nanoscale topographical features that guide cell alignment and differentiation, or incorporating specific biomolecules (e.g., peptides, growth factors) that promote desired cellular responses 81. Smart polymer coatings can provide a dynamic platform for biomimicry, allowing the presentation of bioactive cues to be switched on or off, or their density to be modulated, in response to local physiological needs.

The integration of inorganic nanoparticles into smart polymer matrices offers enhanced functionalities. Silver nanoparticles, well-known for their broad-spectrum antimicrobial properties, can be embedded in pH-responsive polymers to release silver ions selectively at infection sites 53,66. Carbon quantum dots (CQDs) are emerging as promising components in smart polymer films for biomedical diagnostics due to their excellent photostability and biocompatibility, allowing for real-time sensing capabilities 9. Metal oxide nanoparticles, such as TiO2 or ZnO, can impart photocatalytic activity, leading to self-cleaning or antibacterial properties when exposed to light 7,72. The challenge lies in ensuring the long-term stability and controlled release kinetics of these inorganic components within the dynamic polymer matrix, while also mitigating potential toxicity concerns associated with certain nanomaterials 71.

Mechanical and Structural Integrity at the Nanoscale

While smart responsiveness is a key attribute, the mechanical integrity and long-term durability of implant coatings are equally vital. Nanoscale polymer coatings must withstand the harsh mechanical environment of the body, including cyclic loading, shear forces, and abrasion, without delaminating or degrading prematurely 16. Mechanical properties, such as hardness, elasticity, and adhesion strength, are critical parameters that must be optimized 11,16. Techniques like nanoindentation and scratch testing are essential for evaluating these properties at the relevant scale 16.

A particularly exciting development is the concept of self-healing polymer coatings 13. These materials can autonomously repair minor damage (e.g., microcracks) that would otherwise compromise the coating’s protective function or lead to corrosion of the underlying implant. Self-healing mechanisms can involve microcapsule-based systems, where healing agents are released upon damage, or intrinsic healing, where reversible bonds within the polymer network reform. Extending the lifespan of implants through self-healing capabilities could significantly reduce the need for revision surgeries and improve patient quality of life 13.

The diffusion and transport characteristics of nanoscale polymer films are also crucial, particularly for controlled drug release applications 4. The porosity, network density, and swelling behavior of the polymer matrix dictate the rate at which therapeutic agents or ions can pass through the coating. Understanding these transport phenomena, often studied through techniques like neutron scattering 8 or theoretical modeling 6, is essential for designing coatings with predictable release profiles. Furthermore, the aging and degradation behaviors of these nanoscale coatings in the complex biological environment must be thoroughly understood 18. Factors such as hydrolysis, enzymatic degradation, and oxidative stress can alter the coating’s properties over time, potentially leading to loss of function or release of degradation products. Long-term studies, coupled with advanced characterization techniques, are necessary to ensure the clinical viability of these smart systems 18.

Finally, corrosion resistance is a paramount concern for metallic implants. Nanoscale polymer coatings can act as a protective barrier, preventing direct contact between the implant surface and corrosive bodily fluids 32. When these coatings are also smart, they can actively repair damage or release corrosion inhibitors in response to early signs of corrosion, as demonstrated by electrochemical characterization studies 33. The synergy between smart functionality and robust mechanical and barrier properties is essential for developing truly advanced biomedical implants.

Synthetic Strategies and Advanced Characterization for Smart Polymer Coatings

The realization of high-performance nanoscale smart polymer coatings for biomedical implants relies heavily on sophisticated synthetic methodologies that enable precise control over material architecture and composition, coupled with advanced characterization techniques capable of probing their complex properties at the relevant length scales. This section critically examines the prevalent synthetic approaches and the indispensable tools used to understand these intricate systems.

Precision Synthesis Techniques for Nanoscale Polymer Architectures

The fabrication of smart polymer coatings at the nanoscale demands techniques that offer exceptional control over film thickness, uniformity, morphology, and the incorporation of functional elements. Broadly, these methods can be categorized into “bottom-up” approaches, where coatings are built molecularly or supramolecularly, and “top-down” approaches, which involve shaping or patterning pre-formed materials 3. However, many modern techniques blend aspects of both.

One of the most versatile “bottom-up” strategies is Layer-by-Layer (LbL) assembly. This technique involves the sequential adsorption of oppositely charged polyelectrolytes or other functional molecules onto a substrate, forming thin films with nanoscale precision 1. The thickness and composition of the coating can be meticulously controlled by adjusting the number of layers and the properties of the adsorbed species. LbL allows for the incorporation of a wide range of active agents, including drugs, nanoparticles, and biomolecules, within the polymer matrix. By employing pH- or temperature-responsive polyelectrolytes, LbL coatings can be designed to exhibit stimuli-responsive drug release or surface property changes 1.

Surface-initiated polymerization (SIP) techniques, such as surface-initiated atom transfer radical polymerization (SI-ATRP) and surface-initiated reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (SI-RAFT) polymerization, enable the growth of polymer chains directly from an implant surface 3. This approach creates dense, covalently tethered polymer brushes, offering excellent stability and control over polymer chain length and grafting density. The resulting polymer brushes can exhibit responsive behavior, such as changes in swelling or conformation, making them ideal for creating dynamic interfaces. SIP provides a robust method for integrating smart polymers onto complex implant geometries, ensuring strong adhesion and uniform coverage.

Vapor deposition methods, including plasma polymerization, offer another route to create thin, conformal polymer films 3. Plasma polymerization involves the deposition of polymer films from gaseous precursors activated by a plasma discharge. This technique is solvent-free, can be applied to a wide range of substrates, and allows for the deposition of highly cross-linked and chemically diverse films. By controlling the plasma parameters and monomer composition, coatings with tailored chemical functionalities and mechanical properties can be achieved. However, the exact chemical structure of plasma-polymerized films can sometimes be difficult to predict and control precisely.

Solution-based coating techniques, such as dip coating, spray coating, and spin coating, are widely used for their simplicity and scalability. These methods involve immersing or spraying the substrate with a polymer solution, followed by solvent evaporation to form a film. While less precise than LbL or SIP in terms of molecular-level control, they are often more amenable to large-scale manufacturing. The incorporation of functional nanomaterials, such as polymer nanocomposites, into these coatings is a rapidly expanding area 21,31. Nanocomposites, where nanoparticles are dispersed within a polymer matrix, can significantly enhance the mechanical, thermal, electrical, and barrier properties of the coating while also introducing new functionalities like antibacterial activity or advanced sensing capabilities 21,31. The challenge lies in achieving homogeneous dispersion of nanoparticles and preventing their aggregation, which can compromise coating performance.

Emerging fabrication technologies, such as 4D printing, are pushing the boundaries of smart polymer coating design. 4D printing allows for the creation of 3D structures that can change shape or function over time when exposed to specific stimuli 77. While primarily used for bulk scaffolds, the principles are being adapted for creating complex, multi-layered smart coatings with pre-programmed shape transformations or localized drug delivery capabilities. For example, smart biomedical scaffolds made from soybean oil epoxidized acrylate have been developed using 4D printing, demonstrating the potential for complex, responsive architectures 77.

Probing Nanoscale Properties: Advanced Characterization Methodologies

Understanding the behavior and performance of nanoscale smart polymer coatings necessitates a suite of advanced characterization techniques that can resolve features and properties at the relevant length scales, from atomic composition to macroscopic mechanical response.

Surface topography and morphology are critical for modulating cell interactions and dictating overall coating performance. Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) provides high-resolution 3D topographical images, allowing visualization of nanoscale features, roughness, and the precise arrangement of polymer chains or embedded nanoparticles 15. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) offer complementary insights into surface morphology and internal structure, respectively 15. TEM is particularly useful for visualizing the distribution and morphology of nanoparticles within polymer matrices 31.

Chemical composition and bonding are elucidated by techniques such as X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) and Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) 17. XPS provides elemental composition and chemical state information of the outermost few nanometers of the surface, which is crucial for verifying surface functionalization and the presence of specific chemical groups. SIMS offers higher surface sensitivity and can provide molecular information, as well as depth profiling capabilities, allowing for the characterization of multi-layered coatings 17. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy provide information about the molecular vibrations and chemical bonds within the polymer, confirming the presence of specific functional groups and polymer structures 20.

Structural analysis techniques are essential for understanding the internal organization of nanoscale polymer films. Light scattering, X-ray scattering, and neutron scattering can provide insights into polymer chain conformation, molecular weight, and the internal structure of polymer networks or nanocomposites 8,15. Neutron scattering, in particular, is powerful for studying hydrogen-containing polymers and their interactions with solvents or biological media, offering unique information about diffusion and swelling behavior 8.

Wettability and surface energy, which govern protein adsorption and cell adhesion, are quantitatively assessed using contact angle goniometry 5. This technique measures the contact angle of a liquid droplet on the coating surface, providing an indication of its hydrophilicity or hydrophobicity. Dynamic contact angle measurements can also be used to study the reversible changes in wettability of smart coatings in response to stimuli 5.

Mechanical properties at the nanoscale are critical for implant durability. Nanoindentation, a technique that measures the material’s resistance to localized deformation, provides quantitative data on hardness, elastic modulus, and creep behavior of thin films 16. Scratch testing assesses the adhesion and cohesive strength of coatings, indicating their resistance to delamination under mechanical stress 16.

For coatings designed to prevent corrosion, electrochemical characterization techniques are indispensable 33. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and potentiodynamic polarization measurements can quantify the barrier properties of the coating, its resistance to ion penetration, and its ability to protect the underlying metal from corrosion 33. These methods are crucial for evaluating the long-term protective efficacy of smart anticorrosion coatings 32,33.

Finally, non-destructive testing (NDT) studies are gaining importance for evaluating the integrity and performance of coatings without damaging the implant 45. Techniques like ultrasonic testing or thermal imaging could potentially be adapted to monitor coating degradation or changes in properties in situ, although their application to nanoscale polymer coatings on biomedical implants is still an emerging area.

Modeling and Simulation: Predicting Performance and Guiding Design

Given the complexity of nanoscale smart polymer coatings and their interactions with biological systems, computational modeling and simulation play an increasingly vital role in predicting performance and guiding rational design 6. Theoretical approaches, ranging from atomistic simulations to coarse-grained models, can elucidate polymer dynamics, phase transitions, and molecular interactions at interfaces 6.

Molecular dynamics simulations can predict how polymer chains respond to changes in temperature, pH, or solvent composition, offering insights into the swelling and conformational changes that drive smart behavior 6. These models can also simulate the adsorption of proteins onto engineered surfaces, helping to predict and optimize antifouling properties or specific cellular adhesion. Furthermore, computational fluid dynamics can model the transport of drugs or other active agents through porous polymer networks, allowing for the prediction of release kinetics and the design of coatings with desired diffusion characteristics 4.

The integration of computational materials science, as highlighted by initiatives like the Materials Genome Initiative, aims to accelerate the discovery and optimization of new materials by combining high-throughput experimentation with advanced simulation 85. For smart polymer coatings, this could involve developing predictive models for structure-property relationships, allowing researchers to screen vast numbers of polymer chemistries and architectures in silico before costly experimental synthesis. While still in its nascent stages for highly complex smart polymer systems, this approach holds immense promise for streamlining the development pipeline and moving towards truly rational design of next-generation biomedical implants.

Translational Challenges, Clinical Promise, and Future Directions

The scientific advancements in nanoscale smart polymer coatings for biomedical implants are undeniably exciting, yet the path from laboratory innovation to widespread clinical application is fraught with significant translational challenges. Simultaneously, the inherent capabilities of these materials offer a compelling vision for future medical interventions, pointing towards new paradigms in personalized medicine and regenerative therapies.

Overcoming Translational Hurdles

One of the foremost challenges is ensuring the long-term stability and biocompatibility of these dynamic systems in vivo. While in vitro studies provide valuable insights, the complex and constantly changing physiological environment can lead to unforeseen degradation pathways, loss of responsiveness, or altered immunogenic profiles 18. Rigorous, long-term animal studies are essential to assess the true durability, safety, and efficacy of these coatings, and such studies are both time-consuming and expensive. The potential for chronic inflammation, fibrous encapsulation, or the release of cytotoxic degradation products from the polymer matrix or embedded nanoparticles (e.g., silver ions) must be thoroughly evaluated before clinical translation 71.

Scalability and manufacturing reproducibility also represent substantial hurdles. Many of the sophisticated synthesis techniques, such as surface-initiated polymerization or complex layer-by-layer assemblies, are currently optimized for small-scale laboratory settings 3. Translating these methods to industrial-scale production, ensuring batch-to-batch consistency, and maintaining the nanoscale precision on large or complex implant geometries requires significant engineering innovation. Cost-effectiveness is another critical factor; advanced materials and complex manufacturing processes can drive up the cost of implants, potentially limiting their accessibility. A thorough life cycle assessment, considering environmental impact from raw material extraction to disposal, is also gaining importance in the development of new biomedical technologies 10.

The regulatory approval pathway for smart, multi-functional biomedical implants is complex and currently evolving. Traditional regulatory frameworks are often designed for static, single-function devices. Smart coatings that actively release drugs, respond to stimuli, or even self-heal present novel challenges in terms of demonstrating safety and efficacy, predicting long-term behavior, and defining appropriate testing protocols. Clear guidelines and collaborative efforts between researchers, industry, and regulatory bodies will be crucial to facilitate the responsible and timely translation of these technologies.

Emerging Applications and Unexplored Frontiers

Despite these challenges, the clinical promise of nanoscale smart polymer coatings is immense. Beyond mitigating current implant failures, these materials are poised to enable entirely new functionalities.

One such frontier is the integration with advanced diagnostics. The incorporation of elements like carbon quantum dots into smart polymer films could lead to implants that not only respond therapeutically but also provide real-time diagnostic feedback 9. Imagine an orthopedic implant coated with a smart polymer that releases anti-inflammatory agents when inflammation is detected, and simultaneously signals the presence of inflammation to an external reader via changes in its optical properties. This moves towards a vision of “sense-and-respond” systems.

The development of closed-loop, autonomous implants represents an ultimate goal. By combining smart polymer coatings with miniature sensors and microelectronics, devices could be created that continuously monitor physiological parameters (e.g., glucose levels 95, pH, temperature), process this information, and then trigger a precise therapeutic response from the coating 57,68,70,92. While the integration of flexible electronics and wearable sensors for external monitoring is rapidly advancing 57,68,70,92,94,95,97, their seamless and durable integration into deeply implanted devices remains a significant engineering challenge. However, the potential for personalized, adaptive medicine, where implants autonomously adjust treatment based on the patient’s real-time needs, is transformative.

Smart polymer coatings are also revolutionizing tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. By designing scaffolds with nanoscale features and stimuli-responsive properties, researchers can create dynamic microenvironments that guide cell proliferation, differentiation, and tissue formation 55,60,61,76,77,84,90. For example, a smart hydrogel coating on a bone scaffold could release growth factors in a pulsatile manner, mimicking natural physiological signals, or change its stiffness to encourage osteogenic differentiation 61,76,81. The development of 4D printing for smart biomedical scaffolds further exemplifies this trend, enabling structures that can adapt their shape or properties post-implantation to better integrate with regenerating tissues 77. Biomimetic natural biomaterials are also being explored for tissue engineering, further emphasizing the shift towards active, responsive interfaces 90.

Furthermore, the capability for targeted drug and gene delivery from implants is being significantly enhanced by smart polymer coatings 50,51,56,64,67,69,75,78,80,81,83,89,91,93. Nanoparticles, including polymer-based nanoparticles, are increasingly used as drug carriers, and their integration into smart coatings allows for highly localized and controlled release profiles 50,51,56,69,93. This can be particularly beneficial for cancer therapy, where smart nanoparticles can deliver chemotherapeutics directly to tumor sites or for treating neurological diseases by overcoming barriers like the blood-brain barrier 64,67,78,89. For implants, this means drugs can be released precisely when and where needed, minimizing systemic side effects and maximizing therapeutic efficacy. Carbon nanotubes are also being explored as smart drug/gene delivery carriers, further expanding the toolkit for implant-based therapies 91.

Open Questions and Future Research Trajectories

Despite the rapid progress, several fundamental questions and research directions warrant significant attention. A deeper understanding of the long-term interaction between dynamic nanoscale polymer surfaces and the complex biological environment is crucial. How do cells and tissues respond to continuously changing surface properties over years? What are the precise immunological consequences of chronic exposure to stimuli-responsive materials or their degradation products? Addressing these questions will require sophisticated in vivo models and advanced analytical techniques capable of monitoring coating behavior and host response over extended periods.

Developing truly predictive in silico models that can accurately forecast the behavior of smart polymer coatings in biological systems is another critical need. While current models provide valuable insights, integrating biological complexity, such as protein corona formation, cellular signaling cascades, and immune responses, into computational frameworks remains a grand challenge 6,85. Such models would significantly accelerate the design and optimization process, reducing reliance on extensive experimental screening.

The harmonious integration of multiple smart functionalities into a single coating without compromising individual properties is a complex design problem. Achieving a robust, self-healing, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and tissue-integrating coating that responds selectively to multiple stimuli requires innovative polymer chemistries and architectural designs. This often involves trade-offs between different functionalities, and optimizing this balance will be key.

Finally, the long-term sustainability of these advanced materials must be considered. As the field progresses, the environmental impact of polymer synthesis, nanoparticle production, and the disposal of sophisticated biomedical devices will become increasingly important 10,79,99. Research into biodegradable and bioresorbable smart polymers, derived from renewable resources, will be essential for a sustainable future in biomedical implant technology.

Conclusion

The evolution of biomedical implants from passive inert materials to dynamic, intelligent systems represents one of the most exciting frontiers in materials science and medicine. Nanoscale smart polymer coatings are at the vanguard of this transformation, offering unprecedented capabilities to actively engage with the physiological environment, diagnose pathological changes, and deliver targeted therapies on demand. This review has underscored the intricate interplay between polymer chemistry, nanoscale engineering, and biological responsiveness that defines this field.

We have explored how diverse stimuli-responsive mechanisms, from temperature and pH sensitivity to redox and enzymatic triggers, enable precise control over implant performance, mitigating issues such as infection, inflammation, and poor tissue integration 1,2,30,40,42. The critical importance of engineering the nano-bio interface, dictating protein adsorption and cellular interactions through controlled surface chemistry and topography, has been highlighted 1,5,19,35. Furthermore, the integration of functional nanoparticles, such as silver or carbon quantum dots, imbues these coatings with enhanced antimicrobial, diagnostic, and regenerative properties 9,53,66. The ongoing advancements in mechanical properties, including self-healing capabilities and enhanced corrosion resistance, promise to significantly extend implant longevity and reliability 13,16,32,33.

The journey towards widespread clinical translation, however, is not without its formidable challenges. Issues pertaining to long-term in vivo biocompatibility, degradation profiles, manufacturing scalability, and the complexities of regulatory approval demand concerted, interdisciplinary efforts. The field requires more robust, standardized characterization methodologies capable of assessing the dynamic behavior of these complex systems under realistic physiological conditions 31,45. Moreover, the development of sophisticated predictive models, integrating polymer physics with biological complexity, is crucial to accelerate rational design and reduce the reliance on empirical trial-and-error 6,85.

Looking ahead, the future of nanoscale smart polymer coatings for biomedical implants is characterized by a vision of truly autonomous and adaptive devices. The integration of these coatings with advanced sensing technologies and flexible electronics promises closed-loop systems that can continuously monitor physiological states and respond therapeutically without external intervention 57,68,70,92,94,95,97. This paradigm shift will pave the way for highly personalized medicine, where implants are not merely static replacements but active participants in maintaining patient health and facilitating regeneration 76. The continued exploration of biomimetic designs, advanced manufacturing techniques like 4D printing, and sophisticated drug/gene delivery strategies will further unlock the transformative potential of these intelligent interfaces 55,60,61,77,80,81,90.

Ultimately, the successful translation of smart polymer coatings at the nanoscale will require a synergistic approach, bringing together expertise from polymer chemistry, materials science, nanotechnology, biomedical engineering, and clinical medicine. By addressing the current limitations and embracing the exciting opportunities, this field stands poised to revolutionize the performance, safety, and therapeutic impact of biomedical implants, ushering in an era where medical devices are not just functional, but truly intelligent and integrated with the human body. The journey is complex, but the promise of enhanced patient outcomes makes it an endeavor of profound significance.

References (99)

  1. [1] Sujith Pallickal Babu, Samanta Sam, Blessy Joseph, et al.Nanoscale polymer coatings for biomedical implants“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00027-x
  2. [2] Sreyan Ghosh, Jayanta Haldar.Cationic polymer–based antibacterial smart coatings“. Advances in Smart Coatings and Thin Films for Future Industrial and Biomedical Engineering Applications. (2020)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-849870-5.00011-2
  3. [3] Ali Bakhshi, Seyed Morteza Naghib.Synthesis techniques of smart coatings“. Advanced Nanomaterials in Biomedical Implants: Processing, Structures, Properties and, Applications. (2025)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-443-27378-0.00009-x
  4. [4] Tim Zeiner, Michael Fischlschweiger.Diffusion and transport through nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00022-0
  5. [5] Sevda Albayrak, Canser Gül.Contact angle studies of nanoscale polymer based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00018-9
  6. [6] Kurt Binder, Andrey Milchev.Theory, modeling, and simulation in nanoscale polymer coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00013-x
  7. [7] Navinchandra G. Shimpi, Jolina Rodrigues, Shilpa Jain.Photocatalytic nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00032-3
  8. [8] Hadi Rahmaninejad, Rana Ashkar.Neutron scattering studies of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00024-4
  9. [9] Anna Piasek, Jolanta Pulit-Prociak.Application of carbon quantum dots in smart polymer films for biomedical diagnostics“. Nanoscale. (2025)
    DOI: 10.1039/d5nr02878g
  10. [10] Kapil Manoharan, Mohit Pandey, Shantanu Bhattacharya.Life cycle assessment of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00033-5
  11. [11] Pratap Kollu, Chandrasekar Perumal Veeramalai, Sukumar Manickam.Thermal properties of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00021-9
  12. [12] UnknownWITHDRAWN: Wear performance of Ti based alloy coatings on 316L SS fabricated by sputtering method – Relevance to Biomedical Implants“. (2023)
    DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1565129/v2
  13. [13] Swapnita Patra, Shuvendu Shuvankar Purohit, Sarat K. Swain.Self-healing of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00028-1
  14. [14] Amit Goswami, Suresh C. Pillai, Gerard McGranaghan.Nanoscale polymer-based coatings for applications in marine antifouling“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00030-x
  15. [15] Angel Romo-Uribe.Light scattering, X-ray scattering, and microscopy studies of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00023-2
  16. [16] Jesiya Susan George, Suraj P R, Sabu Thomas, et al.Mechanical properties of nanoscale polymer coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00020-7
  17. [17] R.V. Lakshmi, Parthasarathi Bera, S.T. Aruna, et al.XPS and SIMS studies of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00016-5
  18. [18] Arya Uthaman, Hiran Mayookh Lal, Feba Ann Mathew, et al.Aging studies of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00026-8
  19. [19] Sayan Ganguly, Shlomo Margel.Superhydrophobic nanoscale materials for surface coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00029-3
  20. [20] Hemalatha Parangusan, Jolly Bhadra, Deepalekshmi Ponnamma, et al.Spectroscopy characterizations of nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00015-3
  21. [21] Murat Yildirim, Canan Baslak.Polymer nanocomposites in biomedical implants“. Polymeric Materials for Biomedical Implants. (2024)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-323-99690-7.00014-5
  22. [22] Unknown“. (n.d.)
    DOI: 10.1117/12.2260404.5427412073001
  23. [23] Laura Floroian, Andrei Popescu, Natalia Serban, et al.Polymer-Bioglass Composite Coatings: A Promising Alternative For Advanced Biomedical Implants“. Metal, Ceramic and Polymeric Composites for Various Uses. (2011)
    DOI: 10.5772/18339
  24. [24] Arpan Biswas, Akhand Pratap Singh, Dipak Rana, et al.Biodegradable toughened nanohybrid shape memory polymer for smart biomedical applications“. Nanoscale. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1039/c8nr01438h
  25. [25] UnknownElectroactive conductive polymer enables ‘smart’ coatings with corrosion inhibition“. Materials Performance. (2010)
    DOI: 10.5006/mp2010_49_10-10
  26. [26] UnknownPolymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings“. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/c2020-0-03916-2
  27. [27] Rajendra Bordia.Nanoscale Reinforced, Polymer Derived Ceramic Matrix Coatings“. (2009)
    DOI: 10.2172/1025560
  28. [28] Ashutosh Pattanaik, Arunkumar D T, Sujai S, et al.Advanced antiviral nano-smart coatings: Case studies“. Advanced Nanomaterials in Biomedical Implants: Processing, Structures, Properties and, Applications. (2025)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-443-27378-0.00014-3
  29. [29] Franco Centurion, Srinivas Mettu, Md. Arifur Rahim.Nanoscale surface coatings based on plant phenolics“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00017-7
  30. [30] Hanie Ahmadi, Vahid Haddadi-Asl, Hossein Eivaz Mohammadloo.Advancing anticorrosion and antibacterial performance of mg AZ31 implants using novel pH-responsive polymeric surfactant for preparing PLGA nanoparticles“. Surface and Coatings Technology. (2024)
    DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2024.130738
  31. [31] Canan Baslak, Murat Yildirim.Characterization of polymer nanocomposites in biomedical implants“. Polymeric Materials for Biomedical Implants. (2024)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-323-99690-7.00005-4
  32. [32] Yuqin Tian, Haowei Huang, Weishan Wang, et al.Corrosion resistant nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00031-1
  33. [33] Joseph Raj Xavier, Vinodhini S.P, Shanmuga Sundari C, et al.Electrochemical characterizations of the anticorrosive nanoscale polymer-based coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00025-6
  34. [34] Tobias Meier, Santiago D. Solares.Rhodamine-doped nanoporous polymer films as high-performance anti-reflection coatings and optical filters“. Nanoscale. (2016)
    DOI: 10.1039/c6nr04505g
  35. [35] Muhammad Awais, Safee Ullah Chaudhary, Muhammad Sohail Zafar.Biomimetic coatings for orthopedic implants“. Smart Biomimetic Coatings. (2024)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-443-21738-8.00003-5
  36. [36] UnknownAcknowledgments“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00035-9
  37. [37] UnknownCopyright“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00003-7
  38. [38] UnknownPreface“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00006-2
  39. [39] Gaurav Prashar, Hitesh Vasudev, Lalit Thakur, et al.Performance of thermally sprayed hydroxyapatite coatings for biomedical implants: A comprehensive review“. Surface Engineering and Performance of Biomaterials. (2025)
    DOI: 10.1142/9789819812578_0006
  40. [40] Samarth Kulkarni, Noah Malmstadt, Allan S. Hoffman, et al.Micro and Nanoscale Smart Polymer Technologies in Biomedicine“. BioMEMS and Biomedical Nanotechnology. (2006)
    DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-25844-7_16
  41. [41] J.L. Hu, J. Lu.Memory polymer coatings for smart textiles“. Active Coatings for Smart Textiles. (2016)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-08-100263-6.00002-2
  42. [42] Ελευθέριος Κουφάκης.Smart polymer coatings for antimicrobial surfaces“. (n.d.)
    DOI: 10.12681/eadd/47360
  43. [43] UnknownIntroduction“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00007-4
  44. [44] UnknownIndex“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00034-7
  45. [45] Chenmin Zhao, Bing Wang, Shuncong Zhong, et al.NDT studies of nanoscale polymeric coatings“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00019-0
  46. [46] UnknownContents“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00004-9
  47. [47] UnknownFront Matter“. Polymer-Based Nanoscale Materials for Surface Coatings. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-32-390778-1.00002-5
  48. [48] Rodiah Mohd Hassan.Introduction to Nanoscale Textile Coatings“. Engineering Materials. (2024)
    DOI: 10.1007/978-981-97-5922-4_1
  49. [49] A. Kaynak.Conductive polymer coatings“. Active Coatings for Smart Textiles. (2016)
    DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-08-100263-6.00006-x
  50. [50] Jayanta Kumar Patra, Gitishree Das, Leonardo Fernandes Fraceto, et al.Nano based drug delivery systems: recent developments and future prospects“. Journal of Nanobiotechnology. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1186/s12951-018-0392-8
  51. [51] Michael J. Mitchell, Margaret M. Billingsley, Rebecca M. Haley, et al.Engineering precision nanoparticles for drug delivery“. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. (2020)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41573-020-0090-8
  52. [52] Dipen Kumar Rajak, Durgesh D. Pagar, Pradeep L. Menezes, et al.Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composites: Manufacturing, Properties, and Applications“. Polymers. (2019)
    DOI: 10.3390/polym11101667
  53. [53] Tamara Bruna, Francisca Maldonado-Bravo, Paul Jara, et al.Silver Nanoparticles and Their Antibacterial Applications“. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. (2021)
    DOI: 10.3390/ijms22137202
  54. [54] Di Wu, Qi Chen, Xiaojie Chen, et al.The blood–brain barrier: Structure, regulation and drug delivery“. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41392-023-01481-w
  55. [55] Gareth Turnbull, Jon Clarke, F. Picard, et al.3D bioactive composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering“. Bioactive Materials. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.10.001
  56. [56] Domenico Lombardo, Mikhail A. Kiselev, Maria Teresa Caccamo.Smart Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery Application: Development of Versatile Nanocarrier Platforms in Biotechnology and Nanomedicine“. Journal of Nanomaterials. (2019)
    DOI: 10.1155/2019/3702518
  57. [57] H. Ceren Ates, Peter Q. Nguyen, Laura Gonzalez‐Macia, et al.End-to-end design of wearable sensors“. Nature Reviews Materials. (2022)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41578-022-00460-x
  58. [58] Shiza Malik, Khalid Muhammad, Yasir Waheed.Nanotechnology: A Revolution in Modern Industry“. Molecules. (2023)
    DOI: 10.3390/molecules28020661
  59. [59] Giacomo Reina, José M. González‐Domínguez, Alejandro Criado, et al.Promises, facts and challenges for graphene in biomedical applications“. Chemical Society Reviews. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1039/c7cs00363c
  60. [60] Soroosh Derakhshanfar, Rene Mbeleck, Kaige Xu, et al.3D bioprinting for biomedical devices and tissue engineering: A review of recent trends and advances“. Bioactive Materials. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.11.008
  61. [61] Somasundar Mantha, Sangeeth Pillai, Parisa Khayambashi, et al.Smart Hydrogels in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine“. Materials. (2019)
    DOI: 10.3390/ma12203323
  62. [62] Richard Song, Maxwell Murphy, Chenshuang Li, et al.Current development of biodegradable polymeric materials for biomedical applications“. Drug Design Development and Therapy. (2018)
    DOI: 10.2147/dddt.s165440
  63. [63] Rui Yu, Hualei Zhang, Baolin Guo.Conductive Biomaterials as Bioactive Wound Dressing for Wound Healing and Skin Tissue Engineering“. Nano-Micro Letters. (2021)
    DOI: 10.1007/s40820-021-00751-y
  64. [64] Leming Sun, Hongmei Liu, Yanqi Ye, et al.Smart nanoparticles for cancer therapy“. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41392-023-01642-x
  65. [65] Jiale Yong, Feng Chen, Qing Yang, et al.Superoleophobic surfaces“. Chemical Society Reviews. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1039/c6cs00751a
  66. [66] Asim Ali Yaqoob, Hilal Ahmad, Tabassum Parveen, et al.Recent Advances in Metal Decorated Nanomaterials and Their Various Biological Applications: A Review“. Frontiers in Chemistry. (2020)
    DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2020.00341
  67. [67] Akhand Pratap Singh, Arpan Biswas, Aparna Wagle Shukla, et al.Targeted therapy in chronic diseases using nanomaterial-based drug delivery vehicles“. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. (2019)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41392-019-0068-3
  68. [68] Jason Heikenfeld, Andrew J. Jajack, John A. Rogers, et al.Wearable sensors: modalities, challenges, and prospects“. Lab on a Chip. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1039/c7lc00914c
  69. [69] Belén Begines, Tamara Ortíz, María Pérez‐Aranda, et al.Polymeric Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery: Recent Developments and Future Prospects“. Nanomaterials. (2020)
    DOI: 10.3390/nano10071403
  70. [70] Duarte Dias, João Paulo Silva Cunha.Wearable Health Devices—Vital Sign Monitoring, Systems and Technologies“. Sensors. (2018)
    DOI: 10.3390/s18082414
  71. [71] Reza Abbasi, Ghazal Shineh, Mohammadmahdi Mobaraki, et al.Structural parameters of nanoparticles affecting their toxicity for biomedical applications: a review“. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1007/s11051-023-05690-w
  72. [72] Maria P. Nikolova, Murthy Chavali.Metal Oxide Nanoparticles as Biomedical Materials“. Biomimetics. (2020)
    DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics5020027
  73. [73] Matthew Dawber, Karin M. Rabe, J. F. Scott.Physics of thin-film ferroelectric oxides“. Reviews of Modern Physics. (2005)
    DOI: 10.1103/revmodphys.77.1083
  74. [74] Xiaoli Liu, Yifan Zhang, Yanyun Wang, et al.Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy“. Theranostics. (2020)
    DOI: 10.7150/thno.40805
  75. [75] Shiza Malik, Khalid Muhammad, Yasir Waheed.Emerging Applications of Nanotechnology in Healthcare and Medicine“. Molecules. (2023)
    DOI: 10.3390/molecules28186624
  76. [76] Hongpu Wei, Jinjie Cui, Kaili Lin, et al.Recent advances in smart stimuli-responsive biomaterials for bone therapeutics and regeneration“. Bone Research. (2022)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41413-021-00180-y
  77. [77] Shida Miao, Wei Zhu, Nathan J. Castro, et al.4D printing smart biomedical scaffolds with novel soybean oil epoxidized acrylate“. Scientific Reports. (2016)
    DOI: 10.1038/srep27226
  78. [78] Dahua Fan, Yongkai Cao, Meiqun Cao, et al.Nanomedicine in cancer therapy“. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41392-023-01536-y
  79. [79] Asim Ali Yaqoob, Tabassum Parveen, Khalid Umar, et al.Role of Nanomaterials in the Treatment of Wastewater: A Review“. Water. (2020)
    DOI: 10.3390/w12020495
  80. [80] Owen S. Fenton, Katy N. Olafson, Padmini S. Pillai, et al.Advances in Biomaterials for Drug Delivery“. Advanced Materials. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1002/adma.201705328
  81. [81] Zhenming Wang, Zhefeng Wang, William W. Lu, et al.Novel biomaterial strategies for controlled growth factor delivery for biomedical applications“. NPG Asia Materials. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1038/am.2017.171
  82. [82] Kai Liu, Bang Ouyang, Xiaojun Guo, et al.Advances in flexible organic field-effect transistors and their applications for flexible electronics“. npj Flexible Electronics. (2022)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41528-022-00133-3
  83. [83] Jingchao Li, Jianghong Rao, Kanyi Pu.Recent progress on semiconducting polymer nanoparticles for molecular imaging and cancer phototherapy“. Biomaterials. (2017)
    DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.11.025
  84. [84] Shery Jacob, Anroop B. Nair, Jigar Shah, et al.Emerging Role of Hydrogels in Drug Delivery Systems, Tissue Engineering and Wound Management“. Pharmaceutics. (2021)
    DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics13030357
  85. [85] Juan Pablo, Nicholas E. Jackson, Michael A. Webb, et al.New frontiers for the materials genome initiative“. npj Computational Materials. (2019)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41524-019-0173-4
  86. [86] Chetna Dhand, Neeraj Dwivedi, Xian Jun Loh, et al.Methods and strategies for the synthesis of diverse nanoparticles and their applications: a comprehensive overview“. RSC Advances. (2015)
    DOI: 10.1039/c5ra19388e
  87. [87] Cornelia G. Palivan, Roland Goers, Adrian Najer, et al.Bioinspired polymer vesicles and membranes for biological and medical applications“. Chemical Society Reviews. (2015)
    DOI: 10.1039/c5cs00569h
  88. [88] Thabitha P. Dasari Shareena, Danielle McShan, Asok K. Dasmahapatra, et al.A Review on Graphene-Based Nanomaterials in Biomedical Applications and Risks in Environment and Health“. Nano-Micro Letters. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1007/s40820-018-0206-4
  89. [89] Denzil Furtado, Mattias Björnmalm, Scott Ayton, et al.Overcoming the Blood–Brain Barrier: The Role of Nanomaterials in Treating Neurological Diseases“. Advanced Materials. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1002/adma.201801362
  90. [90] Shuai Liu, Jiangming Yu, Yanchang Gan, et al.Biomimetic natural biomaterials for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: new biosynthesis methods, recent advances, and emerging applications“. Military Medical Research. (2023)
    DOI: 10.1186/s40779-023-00448-w
  91. [91] Hossein Zare, Sepideh Ahmadi, Amir Ghasemi, et al.Carbon Nanotubes: Smart Drug/Gene Delivery Carriers“. International Journal of Nanomedicine. (2021)
    DOI: 10.2147/ijn.s299448
  92. [92] Ali K. Yetisen, J. L. Martínez-Hurtado, Barış Ünal, et al.Wearables in Medicine“. Advanced Materials. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1002/adma.201706910
  93. [93] Tomy Muringayil Joseph, Debarshi Kar Mahapatra, Amin Esmaeili, Łukasz Piszczyk, et al.Nanoparticles: Taking a Unique Position in Medicine“. Nanomaterials. (2023)
    DOI: 10.3390/nano13030574
  94. [94] C. García‐Núñez, Libu Manjakkal, Ravinder Dahiya.Energy autonomous electronic skin“. npj Flexible Electronics. (2018)
    DOI: 10.1038/s41528-018-0045-x
  95. [95] Cheng Chen, Xue-Ling Zhao, Zhan-Hong Li, et al.Current and Emerging Technology for Continuous Glucose Monitoring“. Sensors. (2017)
    DOI: 10.3390/s17010182
  96. [96] D. Tejero-Martin, M. Rezvani Rad, A. McDonald, et al.Beyond Traditional Coatings: A Review on Thermal-Sprayed Functional and Smart Coatings“. Journal of Thermal Spray Technology. (2019)
    DOI: 10.1007/s11666-019-00857-1
  97. [97] Wenzheng Heng, Samuel A. Solomon, Wei Gao.Flexible Electronics and Devices as Human–Machine Interfaces for Medical Robotics“. Advanced Materials. (2021)
    DOI: 10.1002/adma.202107902
  98. [98] Ruggero Bosco, Jeroen van den Beucken, Sander C.G. Leeuwenburgh, et al.Surface Engineering for Bone Implants: A Trend from Passive to Active Surfaces“. Coatings. (2012)
    DOI: 10.3390/coatings2030095
  99. [99] Melvin S. Samuel, Madhumita Ravikumar, J. Ashwini John, et al.A Review on Green Synthesis of Nanoparticles and Their Diverse Biomedical and Environmental Applications“. Catalysts. (2022)
    DOI: 10.3390/catal12050459
Export References: BibTeX RIS EndNote
Editor
Author: Editor

Tags: Scie-review

💰 Funding & Support

No specific funding was received for this work.

⚠️ Conflict of Interest

The author(s) declare no conflicts of interest.

📄 License

This article is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

Your Order

No products in the cart.

Discover more from Sciebeta.com

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading