Development of a Decision Support System for Biomaterial Selection Based on MCDM Methods
Source abstract
Abstract
The material selection process can be viewed as a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem with multiple objectives, which are often conflicting and of different importance. The selection of the most suitable biomaterial is considered as a very complex, important, and responsible task that is influenced by many factors. In this paper, a procedure for biomaterial selection based on MCDM is proposed by using a developed decision support system (DSS) named MCDM Solver. Within the framework of the developed DSS, the complete procedure for selecting the criteria weights was developed. Also, in addition to the adapted standard MCDM methods such as TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) and VIKOR (VIšekriterijumsko KOmpromisno Rangiranje), an extended WASPAS (Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment) method was developed, enabling its application for considering target-based criteria in solving biomaterial selection problems. The proposed MCDM Solver enables a structured decision-making process helping decision-makers rank biomaterials with respect to multiple conflicting criteria and make rational and justifiable decisions. For the validation of the developed DSS, two case studies, i.e., the selection of a plate for internal bone fixation and a hip prosthesis, were presented. Finally, lists of potential biomaterials (alternatives) in the considered case studies were ranked based on the selected criteria, where the best-ranked one presents the most suitable choice for the specific biomedical application.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Material Selection and Properties · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Engineering Technology and Methodologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Niš, University of Niš, 18000 Niš, Serbia
Clinic for Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Clinical Center Niš, Faculty of Medicine, University of Niš, 18000 Niš, Serbia
References (90)
Show source-provided references
1. Selection of materials using compromise ranking and outranking methods10.1016/j.matdes.2009.05.016 ↗
2. Engineering biocompatible implant surfaces: Part I: Materials and surfaces10.1016/j.pmatsci.2012.09.001 ↗
3. Raković, D., and Uskoković, D. (2010). Introduction–Chapter 1. Biomaterials, Institute for Technical Science of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. [1st ed.]. (In Serbian).
4. Weighting of dependent and target-based criteria for optimal decision-making in materials selection process: Biomedical applications10.1016/j.matdes.2013.02.064 ↗
5. Selection strategies for materials and processes10.1016/S0261-3069(03)00159-6 ↗
6. Material selection using preferential ranking methods10.1016/j.matdes.2011.09.027 ↗
7. Petković, D., Madić, M., and Radenković, G. (2014, January 23–25). Gear material selection using WASPAS method. Proceedings of the SMAT 2014, Craiova, Romania.
8. Vincke, P. (1992). Multicriteria Decision-Aid, John Wiley & Sons. [1st ed.].
9. Jahan, A., and Edwards, K.L. (2013). Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Supporting the Selection of Engineering Materials in Product Design, Butterworth-Heinemann-Elsevier. [1st ed.].
10. A method for optimal material selection aided with decision making theory10.1016/S0261-3069(99)00066-7 ↗
11. A material selection model based on the concept of multiple attribute decision making10.1016/j.matdes.2004.10.027 ↗
12. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1 ↗
13. Materials selection using complex proportional assessment and evaluation of mixed data methods10.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.010 ↗
14. An application of the analytic network process in multiple criteria material selection10.1016/j.matdes.2012.07.057 ↗
15. Decision making for material selection using the UTA method10.1007/s00170-011-3293-7 ↗
16. Comparative sensitivity analysis in composite material selection: Evaluating OAT and COMSAM methods in multi-criteria decision-making10.31181/smeor21202524 ↗
17. A new biomaterial selection approach using reference ideal method10.1007/s12046-021-01559-7 ↗
18. Hybrid multi-criteria decision making approaches for transtibial prostheses socket material selection10.1007/s42452-025-06841-5 ↗
19. Kumar, R., Dubey, R., Singh, S., Singh, S., Prakash, C., Nirsanametla, Y., Królczyk, G., and Chudy, R. (2021). Multiple-criteria decision-making and sensitivity analysis for selection of materials for knee implant femoral component. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14082084 ↗
20. Integrated multi-attribute decision-making methodology based on integrated comprehensive evaluation index: Application to titanium alloy selection10.1007/s00339-024-07811-1 ↗
21. Kumar, A., and Rajak, S. (2025). Selection of bio-implant materials based on metal additive manufacturing using integrated SWARA and WASPAS MCDM technique. J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 1–21.10.1007/s11665-024-10545-z ↗
22. Hwang, C.L., and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer. [1st ed.].10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9 ↗
23. Materials selection method using TOPSIS with some popular normalization methods10.1088/2631-8695/abd5a7 ↗
24. A target-based normalization technique for materials selection10.1016/j.matdes.2011.09.005 ↗
25. Madić, M., Nedić, B., and Radovanović, M. (2015). Poslovno i Inženjersko Odlučivanje Primenom Metoda Višekriterijumske Analize, Univerzitet u Kragujevcu. [1st ed.].
26. A comprehensive VIKOR method for material selection10.1016/j.matdes.2010.10.015 ↗
27. Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assesment
28. Selection of the Most Suitable Non-Conventional Machining Processes for Ceramics Machining by Using MCDMs10.2298/SOS1502229P ↗
29. Applications of WASPAS Method in Manufacturing Decision Making10.15388/Informatica.2014.01 ↗
30. Petković, D. (2017). Selection of Biomaterials–Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Development of Decision Support System. [Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Niš]. (In Serbian).
31. Petković, D., Madić, M., and Radenković, G. (2015, January 17–18). Ranking of Biomedical Materials by Using Comprehensive WASPAS Method. Proceedings of the MASING 2015, Niš, Serbia.
32. Selection of data conversion technique via sensitivity-performance matching: Ranking of small e-vans with PROBID method
33. A Fermatean Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Manufacturing Outsourcing Vendor Selection: An Improved Combined Compromise Solution Method
34. Čupić, M., Tummala, R., and Suknović, M. (2001). Odlučivanje-Formalni Pristup, Fakultet Organizacionih Nauka. [1st ed.].
35. Turban, E. (1995). Decision Support and Expert Systems: Management Support Systems, Prentice Hall. [4th ed.].
36. Ali, R., Hussain, A., Nazir, S., Khan, S., and Khan, H.U. (2023). Intelligent Decision Support Systems—An Analysis of Machine Learning and Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app132212426 ↗
37. Value analysis: Justifying decision support systems10.2307/249154 ↗
38. Selection of Forklift unit for transport handling using integrated MCDM under neutrosophic environment
39. Optimization of last-mile delivery alternatives using the fuzzy FARE and ADAM multi-criteria decision-making methods
40. A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process10.1007/s00170-011-3366-7 ↗
41. Farag, M.M. (1997). Materials Selection for Engineering Design, Prentice-Hall. [1st ed.].
42. Demeny, P., and McNicoll, G. (2003). Aging of population. The Encyclopedia of Population, Macmillan Reference. [1st ed.].
43. Romero, E. (2013). Powering Biomedical Devices, Elsevier.
44. Boretos, J.W., and Eden, M. (1984). Contemporary Biomaterials, Material and Host Response, Clinical Applications, New Technology and Legal Aspects, Noyes Publications.10.1115/1.3138526 ↗
45. Bandyopadhyay, A., and Bose, S. (2013). Introduction to Biomaterials–Chapter 1. Characterization of Biomaterials, Elsevier. [1st ed.].10.1016/B978-0-12-415800-9.00001-2 ↗
46. Metallic implant biomaterials10.1016/j.mser.2014.10.001 ↗
47. Pignatello, R. (2011). Low Modulus Titanium Alloys for Inhibiting Bone Atrophy–Chapter 12. Biomaterials Science and Engineering, InTech. [1st ed.].10.5772/1956 ↗
48. Mitkovic, M.M., Korunovic, N.D., Milenkovic, S.S., Stojiljkovic, P.M., Manic, M.T., and Trajanovic, M.D. (2024). Forces required to dynamize sliding screws in gamma nail and selfdynamizable internal fixator. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 25.10.1186/s12891-024-07392-3 ↗
49. Marin, E., and Lanzutti, A. (2024). Biomedical Applications of Titanium Alloys: A Comprehensive Review. Materials, 17.10.3390/ma17010114 ↗
50. Rezulati primene originalnih minimalno invazivnih hirurških metoda lečenja preloma
51. Evaluation of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Patients with Pyogenic Spondylitis of the Thoracolumbar Spine10.4236/ojo.2020.1011031 ↗
52. Fractographic investigation of failure in stainless steel orthopedic plates
53. A Systematic Review of the Use of Titanium versus Stainless Steel Implants for Fracture Fixation10.1097/OI9.0000000000000138 ↗
54. Morano, C., Garofalo, S., Bertuccio, P., Sposato, A., Zappone, I., and Pagnotta, L. (2025). A Comprehensive Literature Review of Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): Part 1—Biomaterials. J. Funct. Biomater., 16.10.3390/jfb16050179 ↗
55. Anderson, T.L. (1994). Fracture Mechanics-Fundamentals and Applications, CRC Press. [1st ed.].
56. Lazić Vulićević, L. (2015). Otpornost Prema Zamornom Lomu Zavarenih Cevi od Čelika Povišene Čvrstoće. [PH.D. Thesis, Tehnološko-Metalurški Fakultet].
57. Rao, R.V. (2007). Decision Making in the Manufacturing Environment: Using Graph Theory and Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods, Springer. [1st ed.].
58. Customization and prospects of friction stir processing for improving the biomedical properties of metallic implants for orthopedic applications10.1016/j.jmrt.2024.12.191 ↗
59. Chen, L.Y., Cui, Y.W., and Zhang, L.C. (2020). Recent Development in Beta Titanium Alloys for Biomedical Applications. Metals, 10.10.3390/met10091139 ↗
60. Improving biocompatibility for next generation of metallic implants10.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.101053 ↗
61. Mirea, R., Cucuruz, A.T., Ceatra, L.C., Badea, T., Biris, I., Popescu, E., Paraschiv, A., Ene, R., Sbarcea, G., and Cretu, M. (2021). In-Depth Comparative Assessment of Different Metallic Biomaterials in Simulated Body Fluid. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14112774 ↗
62. Effect of cyclic loading on microstructure and crack propagation in additively manufactured biomaterial Co-Cr-Mo alloy10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.185 ↗
63. Laskowska, D., Bałasz, B., and Zawadka, W. (2024). Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of As-Built Ti-6Al-4V and Ti-6Al-7Nb Alloys Produced by Selective Laser Melting Technology. Materials, 17.10.3390/ma17184604 ↗
64. Additive manufacturing of titanium alloys for biomedical applications: A systematic review
65. Microstructure tailoring of Ti–15Mo alloy fabricated by selective laser melting with high strength and ductility10.1016/j.msea.2021.141962 ↗
66. Ti-Mo Alloys Used in Medical Applications10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1128.105 ↗
67. Study on the mechanical property and microstructure of surgical implanted Ti-6Al-7Nb titanium alloy
68. Removal versus Retention of Orthopaedic Trauma Implants
69. Implant Removal of Osteosynthesis: The Dutch Practice. Results of a Survey10.1186/1752-2897-6-6 ↗
70. Stability of vacancies in β-type Ti-15Mo-5Zr-3Al alloy fabricated via laser powder bed fusion10.1016/j.addlet.2023.100162 ↗
71. Novi koncept totalne endoproteze kuka i rezultati biomehaničkog ispitivanja i kliničke primene
72. Sovilj, B., Igartua, A., Klugmann, E., and Vukelić, Đ. (2003, January 8–10). Tribološki procesi veštačkog zgloba kuka. Proceedings of the 8th International Tribology Conference, Belgrade, Serbia.
73. Zivic, F., Affatato, S., Trajanovic, M., Schnabelrauch, M., Grujovic, N., and Choy, K. (2018). Metallic Biomaterials. Biomaterials in Clinical Practice, Springer. [1st ed.].10.1007/978-3-319-68025-5 ↗
74. Izbor biomaterijala u ortopedskoj hirurgiji
75. Surface Modification of Titanium and Titanium Alloys: Technologies, Developments, and Future Interests10.1002/adem.201901258 ↗
76. Oyane, A., Sakamaki, I., Koga, K., and Nakamura, M. (2020). Formation of a Calcium Phosphate Layer with Immobilized Cobalt Chromite Nanoparticles on Cobalt–Chromium Alloy by a Laser-Assisted Biomimetic Process. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10165584 ↗
77. Selection application of material to be used in hip prosthesis production with analytic hierarchy process: Anwendungsselektion des zu verwendenden Materials in der Hüftprothesenproduktion mit dem analytischen Hierarchieverfahren10.1002/mawe.201700046 ↗
78. (2019). Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673) (Standard No. ASTM F 138-19).
79. (2024). Standard Specification for Wrought Nitrogen Strengthened 22Chromium-13Nickel-5Manganese-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Alloy Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S20910) (Standard No. F1314-24).
80. (2021). Standard Specification for Wrought, Nitrogen Strengthened 23Manganese-21Chromium-1Molybdenum Low-Nickel Stainless Steel Alloy Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S29108) (Standard No. F2229-21).
81. (2021). Standard Specification for Wrought Nitrogen Strengthened 21Chromium—10Nickel—3Manganese—2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Alloy Bar for Surgical Implants (UNS S31675) (Standard No. F1586-21).
82. (2019). Standard Specification for Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants (UNS R31537, R31538, R31539) (Standard No. F799-19).
83. (2020). Standard Specification for Wrought Cobalt-28Chromium-6Molybdenum Alloys for Surgical Implants (UNS R31537, UNS R31538, and UNS R31539) (Standard No. F1537-20).
84. (2022). Standard Specification for Wrought 35Cobalt-35Nickel-20Chromium-10Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R30035) (Standard No. F562-22).
85. (2024). Standard Specification for Wrought Cobalt-20Chromium-15Tungsten-10Nickel Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R30605) (Standard No. F90-24).
86. (2024). Standard Specification for Unalloyed Titanium, for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R50250, UNS R50400, UNS R50550, UNS R50700) (Standard No. F67-24).
87. (2021). Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-6Aluminum-4Vanadium ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R56401) (Standard No. F136—13(2021)e1).
88. (2024). Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-6Aluminum-7Niobium Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R56700) (Standard No. F1295-24).
89. (1992). Material Properties of Titanium and Titanium Alloys; Additional Data (Standard No. DIN:17869:1992).
90. (2022). Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-3Aluminum-2.5Vanadium Alloy Seamless Tubing for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R56320) (Standard No. F2146-22).