Biomimetic Design of Dental Restorative Materials: Conceptual Framework and Translational Challenges

Biomimetics in dental restorative materials has gradually shifted from simply copying the appearance of natural teeth to better understanding how those tissues actually behave. Instead of focusing only on aesthetics, there is now more attention on how enamel and dentin function in real conditions, how they respond to stress, interact with their surroundings, and change over time. Because of this, newer materials are no longer just passive fillers; they are being designed to reflect aspects of natural tooth structure, composition, and behavior within the oral environment. This review brings together key ideas in this area, recent developments, and the challenges that remain. One issue that often comes up is how terms like bioinspired, biomimetic, and bioactive are used. They are sometimes treated as if they mean the same thing, but in practice, they point to different goals or levels of complexity in material design. For instance, some studies focus on creating more organized composite structures or mimicking natural mineralization processes, while others focus on antibacterial surfaces or peptide-based approaches that may support remineralization. There is also growing interest in materials that respond to environmental changes, such as shifts in pH or the early stages of wear. Even with promising laboratory results, these materials are not yet widely used in everyday clinical practice. Several issues continue to slow their adoption, including unclear terminology, limited availability of testing models that reflect real oral conditions, and a lack of long-term clinical data. Part of the challenge lies in the lack of consistent terminology, which can make it harder to compare findings across studies. Manufacturing challenges also remain, particularly when scaling up more complex systems. Moving forward, progress will depend on closer collaboration across disciplines, including materials science, oral biology, microbiology, and digital manufacturing. Such efforts will be important for developing restorative materials that behave more like natural tissues and perform reliably over time inside the mouth.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biomimetics
Published
2026-04-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics11040256
Primary Topic
Dental materials and restorations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Biomimetic Design of Dental Restorative Materials: Conceptual Framework and Translational Challenges

Masoumah Qaw, Tasneem Alluhaidan, Isadora Martini García, Benjamin Hung et al.
Biomimetics
Dental materials and restorations
article

Biomimetic Design of Dental Restorative Materials: Conceptual Framework and Translational Challenges

Masoumah Qaw, Tasneem Alluhaidan, Isadora Martini García, Benjamin Hung, Mary Anne S. Melo
article en

Abstract

Biomimetics in dental restorative materials has gradually shifted from simply copying the appearance of natural teeth to better understanding how those tissues actually behave. Instead of focusing only on aesthetics, there is now more attention on how enamel and dentin function in real conditions, how they respond to stress, interact with their surroundings, and change over time. Because of this, newer materials are no longer just passive fillers; they are being designed to reflect aspects of natural tooth structure, composition, and behavior within the oral environment. This review brings together key ideas in this area, recent developments, and the challenges that remain. One issue that often comes up is how terms like bioinspired, biomimetic, and bioactive are used. They are sometimes treated as if they mean the same thing, but in practice, they point to different goals or levels of complexity in material design. For instance, some studies focus on creating more organized composite structures or mimicking natural mineralization processes, while others focus on antibacterial surfaces or peptide-based approaches that may support remineralization. There is also growing interest in materials that respond to environmental changes, such as shifts in pH or the early stages of wear. Even with promising laboratory results, these materials are not yet widely used in everyday clinical practice. Several issues continue to slow their adoption, including unclear terminology, limited availability of testing models that reflect real oral conditions, and a lack of long-term clinical data. Part of the challenge lies in the lack of consistent terminology, which can make it harder to compare findings across studies. Manufacturing challenges also remain, particularly when scaling up more complex systems. Moving forward, progress will depend on closer collaboration across disciplines, including materials science, oral biology, microbiology, and digital manufacturing. Such efforts will be important for developing restorative materials that behave more like natural tissues and perform reliably over time inside the mouth.

BiomimeticsVol. 11(4)
University of Maryland, Baltimore (US), Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Dental materials and restorations
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.