Interest in cancellous bone analogous materials is driven by the development of tissue engineering and biomaterials. For the past decade, the research focus has been centered on biodegradable materials, in which the ability of the material to safely degrade in the human body while retaining sufficient qualities during service is conveniently cost-effective and less morbid. Among others, magnesium and its alloys have presented the best qualities especially as load-bearing biomaterials. In this article, the promising details of porous magnesium and its alloys as a cancellous bone analogous material developed during the past 10 years are highlighted. The manufacturing processes, mechanical performance, and biocompatibility of porous magnesium and its alloys are discussed. The Achilles’ heel of current evaluation was identified. Further, a few prospective developments of porous magnesium and its alloys are put forward with advanced desirable qualities as a cancellous bone analogous material.
EriksenEFAxelrodDWMelsenF. Bone Histomorphometry, New York: Raven Press, 1994.
2.
AmlingMHerdenSPöslMet al.Heterogeneity of the skeleton: Comparison of the trabecular microarchitecture of the spine, the iliac crest, the femur, and the calcaneus. J Bone Miner Res1996; 11: 36–45.
3.
MorganEFKeavenyTM. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech2001; 34: 569–577.
4.
WeissL. Cell and tissue biology: A textbook of histology, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1988.
5.
SilvaMJKeavenyTMHayesWC. Load sharing between the shell and centrum in the lumbar vertebral body. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)1997; 22: 140–150.
6.
LiuXSBevillGKeavenyTMet al.Micromechanical analyses of vertebral trabecular bone based on individual trabeculae segmentation of plates and rods. J Biomech2009; 42: 249–256.
7.
MartinRBoardmanD. The effects of collagen fiber orientation, porosity, density, and mineralization on bovine cortical bone bending properties. J Biomech1993; 26: 1047–1054.
8.
FazzalariNLForwoodMRSmithKet al.Assessment of cancellous bone quality in severe osteoarthrosis: Bone mineral density, mechanics, and microdamage. Bone1998; 22: 381–388.
9.
BadieiABottemaMJFazzalariNL. Influence of orthogonal overload on human vertebral trabecular bone mechanical properties. J Bone Miner Res2007; 22: 1690–1699.
10.
RouxJPWegrzynJArlotMEet al.Contribution of trabecular and cortical components to biomechanical behavior of human vertebrae: An ex vivo study. J Bone Miner Res2010; 25: 356–361.
11.
JohnellOKanisJA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteopor Int2006; 17: 1726–1733.
12.
ValeACFaustinoJReisLet al.Effect of the strain rate on the twisting of trabecular bone from women with hip fracture. J Biomech Eng2013; 135: 121005–121005.
13.
SanyalAKeavenyTM. Biaxial normal strength behavior in the axial-transverse plane for human trabecular bone–effects of bone volume fraction, microarchitecture, and anisotropy. J Biomech Eng2013; 135: 121010–121010.
FenechCKeavenyT. A cellular solid criterion for predicting the axial-shear failure properties of bovine trabecular bone. J Biomech Eng1999; 121: 414–422.
16.
FatihhiSRabiatulAHarunMet al.Effect of torsional loading on compressive fatigue behaviour of trabecular bone. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2016; 54: 21–32.
17.
HaynesworthSEReubenDCaplanAI. Cell-based tissue engineering therapies: The influence of whole body physiology. Adv Drug Deliv Rev1998; 33: 3–14.
18.
BonadioJ. Tissue engineering via local gene delivery. J Mol Med2000; 78: 303–311.
19.
YusopABakirAShaharomNet al.Porous biodegradable metals for hard tissue scaffolds: A review. Int J Biomater2012; 2012.
20.
XieBParkhillRLWarrenWLet al.Direct writing of three-dimensional polymer scaffolds using colloidal gels. Adv Funct Mater2006; 16: 1685–1693.
21.
Vallet-RegíM. Ceramics for medical applications. J Chem Soc2001; 97–108.
22.
HingKBestSBonfieldW. Characterization of porous hydroxyapatite. J Mater Sci Mater Med1999; 10: 135–145.
23.
DattaPChatterjeeJDharaS. Electrospun nanofibers of a phosphorylated polymer—A bioinspired approach for bone graft applications. Colloids Surf B2012; 94: 177–183.
24.
Althaus J, Urwyler P, Padeste C, et al. Micro-and nanostructured polymer substrates for biomedical applications. SPIE Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2012, p. 83390Q-Q-16.
25.
PattanayakDKFukudaAMatsushitaTet al.Bioactive Ti metal analogous to human cancellous bone: Fabrication by selective laser melting and chemical treatments. Acta Biomater2011; 7: 1398–1406.
26.
PavónJJTruebaPRodríguez-OrtizJAet al.Development of new titanium implants with longitudinal gradient porosity by space-holder technique. J Mater Sci2015; 50: 6103–6112.
27.
TorresAGasparVSerraIet al.Bioactive polymeric–ceramic hybrid 3D scaffold for application in bone tissue regeneration. Mater Sci Eng C2013; 33: 4460–4469.
SousaRAReisRLCunhaAMet al.Processing and properties of bone-analogue biodegradable and bioinert polymeric composites. Compos Sci Technol2003; 63: 389–402.
30.
WeberJNWhiteEW. Carbon-metal graded composites for permanent osseous attachment of non-porous metals. Mater Res Bull1972; 7: 1005–1016.
31.
LefebvreL-PBanhartJDunandD. Porous metals and metallic foams: current status and recent developments. Adv Eng Mater2008; 10: 775–787.
32.
SchmidutzFSprecherCMMilzSet al.Resurfacing of the humeral head: An analysis of the bone stock and osseous integration under the implant. J Orthop Res2015; 33: 1382–1390.
33.
NodzoSRHohmanDWHoyASet al.Short term outcomes of a hydroxyapatite coated metal backed patella. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 1339–1343.
34.
EspallargasNTorresCMuñozA. A metal ion release study of CoCrMo exposed to corrosion and tribocorrosion conditions in simulated body fluids. Wear2014.
35.
HöhnSVirtanenS. Biocorrosion of TiO 2 nanoparticle coating of Ti–6Al–4V in DMEM under specific in vitro conditions. Appl Surf Sci2015; 329: 356–362.
36.
ŽivićFGrujovićNManivasagamGet al.The potential of magnesium alloys as bioabsorbable/biodegradable implants for biomedical applications. Tribol Ind2014; 36.
37.
ZakiyuddinAYunKLeeK. Corrosion behavior of as-cast and hot rolled pure magnesium in simulated physiological media. Metals Mater Int2014; 20: 1163–1168.
38.
NiederlaenderJWalterMKrajewskiSet al.Cytocompatibility evaluation of different biodegradable magnesium alloys with human mesenchymal stem cells. J Mater Sci Mater Med2014; 25: 835–843.
39.
ZhengYGuXWitteF. Biodegradable metals. Mater Sci Eng R2014; 77: 1–34.
40.
BondarenkoAAngrisaniNMeyer-LindenbergAet al.Magnesium-based bone implants: Immunohistochemical analysis of peri-implant osteogenesis by evaluation of osteopontin and osteocalcin expression. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2014; 102: 1449–1457.
41.
ZhangBHouYWangXet al.Mechanical properties, degradation performance and cytotoxicity of Mg–Zn–Ca biomedical alloys with different compositions. Mater Sci Eng C2011; 31: 1667–1673.
42.
ZhangEYangL. Microstructure, mechanical properties and bio-corrosion properties of Mg–Zn–Mn–Ca alloy for biomedical application. Mater Sci Eng A2008; 497: 111–118.
43.
Wen CE, Yamada Y, Shimojima K, et al. Porous bioresorbable magnesium as bone substitute. Materials Science Forum: Trans Tech Publ, 2003, pp.1001–1006.
44.
WenCYamadaYShimojimaKet al.Compressibility of porous magnesium foam: Dependency on porosity and pore size. Mater Lett2004; 58: 357–360.
45.
WenCMabuchiMYamadaYet al.Processing of biocompatible porous Ti and Mg. Scripta Mater2001; 45: 1147–1153.
46.
YamadaYWenCEShimojimaKet al.Compressive deformation characteristics of open-cell mg alloys with controlled cell structure. Mater Trans2002; 43: 1298–1305.
47.
ZhuangHHanYFengA. Preparation, mechanical properties and in vitro biodegradation of porous magnesium scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C2008; 28: 1462–1466.
48.
GengFTanLZhangBet al.Study on beta-TCP coated porous Mg as a bone tissue engineering scaffold material. J Mater Sci Technol2009; 25: 123–129.
49.
WitteFUlrichHRudertMet al.Biodegradable magnesium scaffolds: Part 1: appropriate inflammatory response. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2007; 81: 748–756.
50.
WitteFUlrichHPalmCet al.Biodegradable magnesium scaffolds: Part II: peri-implant bone remodeling. J Biomed Mater Res A2007; 81: 757–765.
51.
GuXZhouWZhengYet al.Degradation and cytotoxicity of lotus-type porous pure magnesium as potential tissue engineering scaffold material. Mater Lett2010; 64: 1871–1874.
52.
NguyenTLStaigerMPDiasGJet al.A novel manufacturing route for fabrication of topologically‐ordered porous magnesium scaffolds. Adv Eng Mater2011; 13: 872–881.
53.
KirklandNKolbeinssonIWoodfieldTet al.Synthesis and properties of topologically ordered porous magnesium. Mater Sci Eng B2011; 176: 1666–1672.
54.
ZhangXLiXWLiJGet al.Preparation and mechanical properties of a novel biomedical magnesium-based scaffold. Key Eng Mater2013; 544: 276–280.
55.
SeyedraoufiZMirdamadiS. Synthesis, microstructure and mechanical properties of porous MgZn scaffolds. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 21: 1–8.
56.
KangM-HJungH-DKimS-Wet al.Production and bio-corrosion resistance of porous magnesium with hydroxyapatite coating for biomedical applications. Mater Lett2013; 108: 122–124.
57.
ČapekJVojtechD. Porous magnesium for medical applications-influence of powder size on mechanical properties. Key Eng Mater2014; 592–593: 342–345.
58.
ČapekJVojtěchD. Effect of sintering conditions on the microstructural and mechanical characteristics of porous magnesium materials prepared by powder metallurgy. Mater Sci Eng C2014; 35: 21–28.
59.
TrinidadJMarcoIArruebarrenaGet al.Processing of magnesium porous structures by infiltration casting for biomedical applications. Adv Eng Mater2014; 16: 241–247.
60.
MorgenthalIAndersenOKostmannCet al.Highly porous magnesium alloy structures and their properties regarding degradable implant application. Adv Eng Mater2014; 16: 309–318.
61.
ZhangXLiX-WLiJ-Get al.Preparation and mechanical property of a novel 3D porous magnesium scaffold for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C2014; 42: 362–367.
62.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeDet al.Development and degradation behavior of magnesium scaffolds coated with polycaprolactone for bone tissue engineering. Mater Lett2014; 132: 106–110.
63.
YazdimamaghaniMRazaviMVashaeeDet al.Surface modification of biodegradable porous Mg bone scaffold using polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite. Mater Sci Eng C2015; 49: 436–444.
64.
JiangGHeG. A new approach to the fabrication of porous magnesium with well-controlled 3D pore structure for orthopedic applications. Mater Sci Eng C2014; 43: 317–320.
65.
AghionEPerezY. Effects of porosity on corrosion resistance of Mg alloy foam produced by powder metallurgy technology. Mater Charact2014; 96: 78–83.
66.
TanLGongMZhengFet al.Study on compression behavior of porous magnesium used as bone tissue engineering scaffolds. Biomed Mater2009; 4: 015016–015016.
67.
YanY-BQiWEIQiuT-Xet al.The effect of threshold value on the architectural parameters and stiffness of human cancellous bone in micro CT analysis. J Mech Med Biol2012; 12: 1250092–1250092.
68.
FatihhiSHarunMKadirMRAet al.Uniaxial and multiaxial fatigue life prediction of the trabecular bone based on physiological loading: A comparative study. Ann Biomed Eng2015; 43: 1–16.
69.
ShimojimaKChinoYYamadaYet al.Compression test simulation of controlled cell shape open cellular magnesium alloy under dynamic loading. Mater Trans-JIM2001; 42: 1326–1331.
70.
DorozhkinSV. Calcium orthophosphate coatings on magnesium and its biodegradable alloys. Acta Biomater2014; 10: 2919–2934.
71.
LewisG. Properties of open-cell porous metals and alloys for orthopaedic applications. J Mater Sci Mater Med2013; 24: 2293–2325.
72.
YangYMichalczykCSingerFet al.In vitro study of polycaprolactone/bioactive glass composite coatings on corrosion and bioactivity of pure Mg. Appl Surf Sci2015; 355: 832–841.
73.
ČapekJVojtěchD. Properties of porous magnesium prepared by powder metallurgy. Mater Sci Eng C2013; 33: 564–569.
74.
ZhangXLiXLiJet al.Processing, microstructure and mechanical properties of biomedical magnesium with a specific two-layer structure. Prog Nat Sci Mater Int2013; 23: 183–189.
75.
BobeKWillboldEMorgenthalIet al.In vitro and in vivo evaluation of biodegradable, open-porous scaffolds made of sintered magnesium W4 short fibres. Acta Biomater2013; 9: 8611–8623.
76.
WuFLiuCO’NeillBet al.Fabrication and properties of porous scaffold of magnesium phosphate/polycaprolactone biocomposite for bone tissue engineering. Appl Surf Sci2012; 258: 7589–7595.
77.
OtsukiBTakemotoMFujibayashiSet al.Pore throat size and connectivity determine bone and tissue ingrowth into porous implants: Three-dimensional micro-CT based structural analyses of porous bioactive titanium implants. Biomaterials2006; 27: 5892–5900.
78.
WalkerJShadanbazSWoodfieldTBet al.Magnesium biomaterials for orthopedic application: A review from a biological perspective. J Biomed Mater Res B2014; 102: 1316–1331.
79.
MordikeBEbertT. Magnesium: Properties—applications—potential. Mater Sci Eng A2001; 302: 37–45.
80.
GhaliEDietzelWKainerK-U. General and localized corrosion of magnesium alloys: A critical review. J Mater Eng Perform2004; 13: 7–23.
81.
WitteF. The history of biodegradable magnesium implants: A review. Acta Biomater2010; 6: 1680–1692.
82.
WitteFHortNVogtCet al.Degradable biomaterials based on magnesium corrosion. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci2008; 12: 63–72.
83.
SongGSongS-z. A possible biodegradable magnesium implant material. Adv Eng Mater2007; 9: 298–302.
84.
SongYShanDHanE. Electrodeposition of hydroxyapatite coating on AZ91D magnesium alloy for biomaterial application. Mater Lett2008; 62: 3276–3279.
85.
SongG. Control of biodegradation of biocompatable magnesium alloys. Corros Sci2007; 49: 1696–1701.
86.
WitteFFischerJNellesenJet al.In vitro and in vivo corrosion measurements of magnesium alloys. Biomaterials2006; 27: 1013–1018.
87.
KirklandNLespagnolJBirbilisNet al.A survey of bio-corrosion rates of magnesium alloys. Corros Sci2010; 52: 287–291.
88.
AtrensALiuMAbidinNIZ. Corrosion mechanism applicable to biodegradable magnesium implants. Mater Sci Eng B2011; 176: 1609–1636.
89.
LiZGuXLouSet al.The development of binary Mg–Ca alloys for use as biodegradable materials within bone. Biomaterials2008; 29: 1329–1344.
90.
KannanMBRamanRS. In vitro degradation and mechanical integrity of calcium-containing magnesium alloys in modified-simulated body fluid. Biomaterials2008; 29: 2306–2314.
91.
GuXZhengYChengYet al.In vitro corrosion and biocompatibility of binary magnesium alloys. Biomaterials2009; 30: 484–498.
92.
AbidinNIZMartinDAtrensA. Corrosion of high purity Mg, AZ91, ZE41 and Mg2Zn0. 2Mn in Hank’s solution at room temperature. Corros Sci2011; 53: 862–872.
93.
LiuYYangZTanLet al.An animal experimental study of porous magnesium scaffold degradation and osteogenesis. Brazil J Med Biol Res2014; 47: 715–720.
94.
ZengRDietzelWWitteFet al.Progress and challenge for magnesium alloys as biomaterials. Adv Eng Mater2008; 10: B3–B14.
95.
PourbaixM. Atlas of electrochemical equilibria in aqueous solutions, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1974.
96.
DingYWenCHodgsonPet al.Effects of alloying elements on the corrosion behavior and biocompatibility of biodegradable magnesium alloys: A review. J Mater Chem B2014; 2: 1912–1933.
97.
LiHXieXZhengYet al.Development of biodegradable Zn-1X binary alloys with nutrient alloying elements Mg, Ca and Sr. Scientific Reports2015; 5.
98.
ZhuKPrinceRL. Calcium and bone. Clin Biochem2012; 45: 936–942.
99.
MatsuzakiH. Prevention of osteoporosis by foods and dietary supplements. Magnesium and bone metabolism. Clin Calcium2006; 16: 1655–1660.
100.
CabreraWESchrootenIDe BroeMEet al.Strontium and bone. J Bone Miner Res1999; 14: 661–668.
101.
WitteFKaeseVHaferkampHet al.In vivo corrosion of four magnesium alloys and the associated bone response. Biomaterials2005; 26: 3557–3563.
102.
YunYDongZYangDet al.Biodegradable Mg corrosion and osteoblast cell culture studies. Mater Sci Eng C2009; 29: 1814–1821.
103.
ReifenrathJKrauseABormannDet al.Profound differences in the in-vivo-degradation and biocompatibility of two very similar rare-earth containing Mg-alloys in a rabbit model. Massive Unterschiede im in-vivo-Degradationsverhalten und in der Biokompatibilität zweier sehr ähnlicher Seltene-Er. Material Werkstoff2010; 41: 1054–1061.
104.
Di VirgilioALReigosaMde MeleMF. Biocompatibility of magnesium particles evaluated by in vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity assays. J Biomed Mater Res B2011; 99: 111–119.
105.
KrausTFischerauerSFHänziACet al.Magnesium alloys for temporary implants in osteosynthesis: In vivo studies of their degradation and interaction with bone. Acta Biomater2012; 8: 1230–1238.
106.
LozanoRMPerez-MacedaBTCarbonerasMet al.Response of MC3T3-E1 osteoblasts, L929 fibroblasts, and J774 macrophages to fluoride surface-modified AZ31 magnesium alloy. J Biomed Mater Res A2013; 101: 2753–2762.
107.
DouYLiNZhengYet al.Effects of fluctuant magnesium concentration on phenotype of the primary chondrocytes. J Biomed Mater Res A2014; 102: 4455–4463.
108.
LiRWKirklandNTTruongJet al.The influence of biodegradable magnesium alloys on the osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. J Biomed Mater Res A2014; 102: 4346–4357.
109.
PichlerKKrausTMartinelliEet al.Cellular reactions to biodegradable magnesium alloys on human growth plate chondrocytes and osteoblasts. Int Orthop2014; 38: 881–889.
110.
PichlerKFischerauerSFerlicPet al.Immunological response to biodegradable magnesium implants. JOM2014; 66: 573–579.
111.
WalkerJShadanbazSWoodfieldTBet al.The in vitro and in vivo evaluation of the biocompatibility of Mg alloys. Biomed Mater2014; 9: 015006–015006.
112.
PompaLRahmanZUMunozEet al.Surface characterization and cytotoxicity response of biodegradable magnesium alloys. Mater Sci Eng C2015; 49: 761–768.
113.
HuehnerschulteTAReifenrathJvon RechenbergBet al.In vivo assessment of the host reactions to the biodegradation of the two novel magnesium alloys ZEK100 and AX30 in an animal model. Biomed Eng Online2012; 11: 14–14.
114.
ReifenrathJAngrisaniNErdmannNet al.Degrading magnesium screws ZEK100: biomechanical testing, degradation analysis and soft-tissue biocompatibility in a rabbit model. Biomed Mater2013; 8: 045012–045012.
115.
DryndaADeinetNBraunNet al.Rare earth metals used in biodegradable magnesium-based stents do not interfere with proliferation of smooth muscle cells but do induce the upregulation of inflammatory genes. J Biomed Mater Res A2009; 91: 360–369.
116.
SpeichMBousquetBNicolasG. Reference values for ionized, complexed, and protein-bound plasma magnesium in men and women. Clin Chem1981; 27: 246–248.
117.
RubinH. Magnesium: The missing element in molecular views of cell proliferation control. Bioessays2005; 27: 311–320.
118.
RubinH. Degrees and kinds of selection in spontaneous neoplastic transformation: An operational analysis. Proc Natnl Acad Sci USA2005; 102: 9276–9281.
119.
RomaniAScarpaA. Regulation of cell magnesium. Arch Biochem Biophys1992; 298: 1–12.
120.
HartwigA. Role of magnesium in genomic stability. Mutat Res/Fundam Molec Mech Mutagen2001; 475: 113–121.
121.
RinkTTsienRPozzanT. Cytoplasmic pH and free Mg2 + in lymphocytes. J Cell Biol1982; 95: 189–196.
122.
SchlingmannKPGudermannT. A critical role of TRPM channel‐kinase for human magnesium transport. J Physiol2005; 566: 301–308.
123.
KraftRHarteneckC. The mammalian melastatin-related transient receptor potential cation channels: An overview. Pflügers Archiv2005; 451: 204–211.
124.
GrzesiakJJBouvetM. Activation of the α2β1 integrin‐mediated malignant phenotype on type I collagen in pancreatic cancer cells by shifts in the concentrations of extracellular Mg2 + and Ca2 + . Int J Cancer2008; 122: 2199–2209.
125.
GrzesiakJJPierschbacherMD. Shifts in the concentrations of magnesium and calcium in early porcine and rat wound fluids activate the cell migratory response. J Clin Investig1995; 95: 227–227.
JohnsonJRKRiechmannGC. Normal serum calcium levels by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Clin Chem1968; 14: 1218–1225.
128.
RenkemaKYAlexanderRTBindelsRJet al.Calcium and phosphate homeostasis: Concerted interplay of new regulators. Ann Med2008; 40: 82–91.
129.
TahánJEGranadilloVARomeroRA. Electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometric determination of Al, Cu, Fe, Pb, V and Zn in clinical samples and in certified environmental reference materials. Analyt Chim Acta1994; 295: 187–197.
130.
RousselleAHeymannDDemaisVet al.Influence of metal ion solutions on rabbit osteoclast activities in vitro. Histol Histopathol2002; 17: 1025–1032.
131.
KiilerichSChristensenMSNaestoftJet al.Determination of zinc in serum and urine by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Relationship between serum levels of zinc and proteins in 104 normal subjects. Clin Chim Acta1980; 105: 231–239.
132.
LastraMDPastelinRCamachoAet al.Zinc intervention on macrophages and lymphocytes response. J Trace Elem Med Biol2001; 15: 5–10.
133.
RosenbergKOlssonHMörgelinMet al.Cartilage oligomeric matrix protein shows high affinity zinc-dependent interaction with triple helical collagen. J Biol Chem1998; 273: 20397–20403.
134.
SaltmanPDStrauseLG. The role of trace minerals in osteoporosis. J Am Coll Nutrit1993; 12: 384–389.
135.
Isabel PostJKarl EiblJMichiel RossG. Zinc induces motor neuron death via a selective inhibition of brain-derived neurotrophic factor activity. Amyotroph Lateral Scler2008; 9: 149–155.
136.
BaruthioFGuillardOArnaudJet al.Determination of manganese in biological materials by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry: A review. Clin Chem1988; 34: 227–234.
137.
AschnerMGuilarteTRSchneiderJSet al.Manganese: Recent advances in understanding its transport and neurotoxicity. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol2007; 221: 131–147.
BockNAPaivaFFNascimentoGCet al.Cerebrospinal fluid to brain transport of manganese in a non-human primate revealed by MRI. Brain Res2008; 1198: 160–170.
140.
HamiltonE. Review of the chemical elements and environmental chemistry—strategies and tactics. Sci Total Environ1976; 5: 1–62.
141.
SocaciuCLeucutaE. Effects of long-term administration of lithium and hydrochlorothiazlde in rats. Met Based Drugs1999; 6: 87–93.
142.
BichetDG. Lithium, cyclic AMP signaling, A-kinase anchoring proteins, and aquaporin-2. J Am Soc Nephrol2006; 17: 920–922.
143.
SahinOSulakOYavuzYet al.Lithium‐induced lung toxicity in rats: The effect of caffeic acid phenethyl ester (CAPE). Pathology2006; 38: 58–62.
144.
GilesJJBanniganJG. Teratogenic and developmental effects of lithium. Current Pharmaceut Des2006; 12: 1531–1541.
145.
FeyerabendFSiemersCWillumeitRet al.Cytocompatibility of a free machining titanium alloy containing lanthanum. J Biomed Mater Res A2009; 90: 931–939.
146.
JiYXiaoBWangZet al.The suppression effect of light rare earth elements on proliferation of two cancer cell lines. Biomed Environ Sci2000; 13: 287–292.
147.
KostovaIMomekovGStanchevaP. New samarium (III), gadolinium (III), and dysprosium (III) complexes of coumarin-3-carboxylic acid as antiproliferative agents. Met Based Drugs2007; 2007: 15925–15925.
148.
MagdaDMillerRA. Motexafin gadolinium: A novel redox active drug for cancer therapy. Semin Cancer Biol2006; 16: 466–476.
