Fabrication and finite element analysis of stereolithographic 3D printed microneedles for transdermal delivery of model dyes across human skin in vitro

2019 ◽  
Vol 137 ◽  
pp. 104976 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iakovos Xenikakis ◽  
Manolis Tzimtzimis ◽  
Konstantinos Tsongas ◽  
Dimitrios Andreadis ◽  
Euterpi Demiri ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiki Yamazaki ◽  
Natsuko Murakami ◽  
Shizuka Suzuki ◽  
Kazuyuki Handa ◽  
Masaru Yatabe ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 921-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lina Yan ◽  
Joel Louis Lim ◽  
Jun Wei Lee ◽  
Clement Shi Hao Tia ◽  
Gavin Kane O’Neill ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. E11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil R. Crawford ◽  
Jeffery D. Arnett ◽  
Joshua A. Butters ◽  
Lisa A. Ferrara ◽  
Nikhil Kulkarni ◽  
...  

Different methods have been described by numerous investigators for experimentally assessing the kinematics of cervical artificial discs. However, in addition to understanding how artificial discs affect range of motion, it is also clinically relevant to understand how artificial discs affect segmental posture. The purpose of this paper is to describe novel considerations and methods for experimentally assessing cervical spine postural control in the laboratory. These methods, which include mechanical testing, cadaveric testing, and computer modeling studies, are applied in comparing postural biomechanics of a novel postural control arthroplasty (PCA) device versus standard ball-and-socket (BS) and ball-in-trough (BT) arthroplasty devices. The overall body of evidence from this group of tests supports the conclusion that the PCA device does control posture to a particular lordotic position, whereas BS and BT devices move freely through their ranges of motion.


Author(s):  
Nicole A. DeVries ◽  
Nicole A. Kallemeyn ◽  
Kiran H. Shivanna ◽  
Nicole M. Grosland

Due to the limited availability of human cadaveric specimens, sheep are often utilized for in vitro studies of various spinal disorders and surgical techniques. Understanding the similarities and differences between the human and sheep spine is crucial for constructing a valuable study and interpreting the results. Several studies have identified the anatomical similarities between the sheep and human spine; however these studies have been limited to quantifying the anatomic dimensions as opposed to the biomechanical responses [1–2]. Although anatomical similarities are important, biomechanical correspondence is imperative for studying the effects of disorders, surgical techniques, and implant designs. Studies by Wilke and colleagues [3] and Clarke et al. [4] have focused on experimental biomechanics of the sheep cervical functional spinal units (FSUs).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document