Table 3.

Advantageous and disadvantages of MOFs and other nanomaterials.

Porous Materials	Composition	Advantages	Disadvantages	Reference
MOFs	Metal–organic framework (MOF) Organic ligands and their coordinated metal ions/ion clusters	Ordered porous structure, biocompatibility, and ease of functional modification.	Targeting and potential biotoxicity.	[95,96]
COFs	Light elements (H, C, N, O, B)	Large surface area, high thermal stability, good biocompatibility, and good biodegradability.	The synthesis condition is not mild enough, the preparation cost is high, and the structure is uncontrollable.	[97,98]
MIPs	Conductive polymers	Good biocompatibility and excellent selectivity	usually higher effort required for template cleavage after MIP synthesis	[99,100]
LDH	Metals and hydroxide molecules separated by exchangeable anions and water molecules	High conductivity	Complicated and expensive synthesis procedures	[101,102]
CNTs	A layer of carbon atoms that are bonded together in a hexagonal (honeycomb) mesh	High surface area Antifouling	High cost synthesis and purification procedures	[103,104]
Graphene	Carbon atoms positioned in a hexagonal design	Excellent flexibility	Sophisticated synthesis procedures and may be toxic (e.g the use of hydrazine)	[105,106]
Mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSN)	Silica (SiO2)	Huge loading capacity, controllable particle size and shape, suitability for easy functionalization, and biocompatibility.	Poor dispersibility and stability, prone to accumulation, and requires modification. A fully reversible lid is required to close the pore access.	[107,108]