3D Printing – an avenue for accessible innovation in urology

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-152
Author(s):  
Jasamine Coles-Black ◽  
Ian Chao ◽  
Jason Chuen ◽  
Nathan Lawrentschuk ◽  
Dennis Gyomber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Ileal Conduit ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Special Report ◽  
Manufacturing Technique ◽  
Healthcare Environment ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Stoma Care

3D printing is a novel manufacturing technique that allows surgeons to turn their ideas into reality within the healthcare environment. While surgeons are accustomed to assuming a position of leadership where frontier technologies intersect with patient care, barriers to the uptake of 3D printing include lack of expertise among surgeons, and the perceived cost and inaccessibility of the technology. This special report highlights the ease and cost–effectiveness of this new technology with a uro-oncological lens. We highlight the example of a 3D printed flexible urostomy trainer developed to educate patients on stoma care prior to ileal conduit surgery, which was 3D printed in our hospital for £0.15 within an hour of conception by our urology department.

Utility and cost–effectiveness of 3D-printed materials for clinical use

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Vitali ◽  
Matthew Cheng ◽  
Michael Wagels
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Clinical Use ◽  
Surgical Guides ◽  
Rigorous Testing ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Surgical Adjunct ◽  
Printed Materials

This review summarizes the utility of 3D-printing as a surgical adjunct, reviewing the cost–effectiveness. The relevant literature was analyzed outlining the utility and/or cost–effectiveness of 3D-printing for clinical use. Compared with existing methods, the evidence suggests an advantage of using 3D-printing as a technology in the treatment of complex clinical cases. However, in high frequency cases, the additional preoperative expenses are not justified. Considerable evidence of its clinical benefits exists for the application of 3D-printed anatomical models and teaching tools. However, the evidence supporting 3D-printing’s use as surgical guides or implantable devices is less clear. Furthermore, caution must exist when using these devices in the clinical setting due to a paucity of rigorous testing, global regulation and long-term data.

scholarly journals Benefits And Limitations Of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology For Ecological Research

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jocelyn E. Behm ◽  
Brenna R. Waite ◽  
S. Tonia Hsieh ◽  
Matthew R. Helmus
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Wood Fiber ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Model Organisms ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Predator Attack ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
3D Printed

AbstractBackgroundEcological research often involves sampling and manipulating non-model organisms that reside in heterogeneous environments. As such, ecologists often adapt techniques and ideas from industry and other scientific fields to design and build equipment, tools, and experimental contraptions custom-made for the ecological systems under study. Three-dimensional (3D) printing provides a way to rapidly produce identical and novel objects that could be used in ecological studies, yet ecologists have been slow to adopt this new technology. Here, we provide ecologists with an introduction to 3D printing.ResultsFirst, we give an overview of the ecological research areas in which 3D printing is predicted to be the most impactful and review current studies that have already used 3D printed objects. We then outline a methodological workflow for integrating 3D printing into an ecological research program and give a detailed example of a successful implementation of our 3D printing workflow for 3D printed models of the brown anole, Anolis sagrei, for a field predation study. After testing two print media in the field, we show that the models printed from the less expensive and more sustainable material (blend of 70% plastic and 30% recycled wood fiber) were just as durable and had equal predator attack rates as the more expensive material (100% virgin plastic).ConclusionsOverall, 3D printing can provide time and cost savings to ecologists, and with recent advances in less toxic, biodegradable, and recyclable print materials, ecologists can choose to minimize social and environmental impacts associated with 3D printing. The main hurdles for implementing 3D printing – availability of resources like printers, scanners, and software, as well as reaching proficiency in using 3D image software – may be easier to overcome at institutions with digital imaging centers run by knowledgeable staff. As with any new technology, the benefits of 3D printing are specific to a particular project, and ecologists must consider the investments of developing usable 3D materials for research versus other methods of generating those materials.

3D printing: Of signs and objects

Semiotica ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (218) ◽  
pp. 165-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Perkins-Buzo
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Mass Production ◽  
Rare Case ◽  
Physical Object ◽  
Complex Case ◽  
Simple Extension ◽  
Manufacturing Technique ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
3D Printed

Abstract3D printing has surely come of age. Widely available, and integrated into many computer-based design and animation curricula, it almost seems to have become a simple extension of what we already had in 2D printing. A 2D image (e.g., of a pipe) acts as the basis of a sign, which, perhaps upon further twists of the semiotic spiral, may lead one to cognition of a 3D physical pipe. But then, perhaps not. And only in a rare case would the physical pipe in turn find use as a sign of the aforesaid 2D image. With 3D printing, this order of semiosis no longer applies. Since 3D printing mainly occurs as a non-mass-production manufacturing technique, a 3D-printed artifact acts as a physical object – and generally it is printed to act precisely in that manner. It is a being that has an ontic difference from its digital source. The case of 3D printing provides an intriguing, complex, case study for semiosis, since the printables move in and out of the virtual and physical.

scholarly journals 3D Printed Splints an Innovative Method to Treat Temporomandibular Joint Pathology

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (11) ◽  
pp. 3087-3090
Author(s):  
Adina Sirbu ◽  
Roxana Bordea ◽  
Ondine Lucaciu ◽  
Claudia Braitoru ◽  
Camelia Szuhanek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Contact Points ◽  
Innovative Method ◽  
Joint Pathology ◽  
Dental Technician ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Plaster Model ◽  
Salt And Pepper

3D printing is a new technology with a particular resonance in dentistry which will become an important tool for all dental fields. In patients with TMJ pathology splints are used very often used to release the pain and to put the mandible in a centric relation. Conventional splints are made from acrylic designed by the dental technician with salt and pepper method or composite resins also designed by a dental technician on plaster model casts while 3D printed splints are computer designed so they can be preview resulting thus a much more accuracy in form and contact points.

First FDA Approved 3D Printed Drug Paved New Path for Increased Precision in Patient Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-103
Author(s):  
C. Venkateswara Reddy ◽  
Balamuralidhara V. ◽  
M.P. Venkatesh ◽  
T.M. Pramod Kumar
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Manufacturing Method ◽  
Branded Drug ◽  
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers ◽  
Solid Dose ◽  
Subtractive Manufacturing ◽  
Financial Growth ◽  
3D Printed

The pharmaceutical industry is developed every year with the aim of public health, safety, and financial growth. Keeping public safety in mind, the industry is mostly concentrated on novel plans in the drug development process and plans on how to increase the curing rate of a disorder and building up the accuracy in patient care. The increase in the number of diseases has led to the generic and branded drug competition by which the pressure on the market has increased. The pharmaceutical manufacturers are attempting to find the needs of patients in different ways. The industries were manufacturing the drugs in unique ways which help to increase their productivity and also to increase the patient experience. Due to this, all pharmaceutical manufacturers are trying to manufacture drugs using 3D printing. In 2015, the industries succeeded by manufacturing the drug Spritam using 3D printing and it was the first prescribed drug manufactured by using 3D printing (3DP). 3DP is the process of depositing powder in a layer upon layer that was opposite to subtractive manufacturing and it is perfect for pharmaceuticals because it provides enhanced accuracy in the development and formulation of dosage forms. The 3DP has different advantages to companies and patients like an increase in dissolution rate, absorption, adherence, efficacy, and long life of branded drugs along with the decrease in pill burden. This process leads to a break in the manufacturing method of drugs but helps to overcome several problems and also helps in better patient outcomes in the solid dose markets.

scholarly journals Next Steps in 3D Printing of Fast Dissolving Oral Films for Commercial Production

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Touraj Ehtezazi ◽  
Marwan Algellay ◽  
Alison Hardy
Keyword(s):  
Drug Delivery ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Drug Delivery Systems ◽  
Process Analytical Technology ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Delivery Systems ◽  
Standard Drug ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Oral Films ◽  
Analytical Technology

3D printing technique has been utilised to develop novel and complex drug delivery systems that are almost impossible to produce by employing conventional formulation techniques. For example, this technique may be employed to produce tablets or Fast Dissolving oral Films (FDFs) with multilayers of active ingredients, which are personalised to patient’s needs. In this article, we compared the production of FDFs by 3D printing to conventional methods such as solvent casting. Then, we evaluated the need for novel methods of producing fast dissolving oral films, and why 3D printing may be able to meet the shortfalls of FDF production. The challenges of producing 3D printed FDFs are identified at commercial scale by referring to the identification of suitable materials, hardware, qualitycontrol tests and Process Analytical Technology. In this paper, we discuss that the FDF market will grow to more than $1.3 billion per annum in the next few years and 3D printing of FDFs may share part of this market. Although companies are continuing to invest in technologies, which provide alternatives to standard drug delivery systems, the market for thin-film products is already well established. Market entry for a new technology such as 3D printing of FDFs will, therefore, be hard, unless, this technology proves to be a game changer. A few approaches are suggested in this paper.

Anisotropic Material Behaviors of 3D Printed Carbon-Fiber Polymer Composites With Open-Source Printers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Garcia ◽  
Robert Harper ◽  
Y. Charles Lu
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Carbon Fiber ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Polymer Composites ◽  
Mechanical Responses ◽  
Manufacturing Technique ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Traditional Manufacturing

Abstract Composite products are often created using traditional manufacturing methods such as compression or injection molding. Recently, additive manufacturing (3D printing) techniques have been used for fabricating composites. 3D printing is the process of producing three-dimensional parts through the successive combination of various layers of material. This layering effect in combination with exposure to ambient (or reduced) temperature and pressure cause the finished products to have inconsistent microstructures. The inconsistent microstructures along with the oriented reinforcing fibers create anisotropic parts with difficulty to predict mechanical properties. In this paper, the mechanical properties of fiber reinforced polymer composites produced by additive manufacturing technique (3D printing) and by traditional manufacturing technique (compression molding) were investigated. Three open-source 3D printers, i.e. FlashForge Dreamer, Tevo Tornado, and Prusa i3 Mk3, were used to fabricate bending samples from carbon-fiber reinforced ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene). Results showed that there exist significant discrepancies and anisotropies in mechanical properties of 3D printed composites. First, the properties vary greatly among parts made from different printers. Secondly, the mechanical responses of 3D printed parts strongly depend upon the orientations of the filaments. Parts with the infill oriented along the length of the specimens showed the most favorable mechanical responses such as Young’s modulus, maximum strength, and toughness. Thirdly, all 3D printed parts exhibit inferior properties to those made by conventional manufacturing. Finally, theoretical modeling has been attempted to predict the mechanical responses of 3D printed products and can potentially be used to “design” the 3D printing processes to achieve the optimal performance.

scholarly journals Solvent-based Extrusion 3D Printing for the Fabrication of Tissue Engineering Scaffolds

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Zhang ◽  
Rodica Cristescu ◽  
Douglas B. Chrisey ◽  
Roger J. Narayan
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Engineering ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Tissue Engineering Scaffolds ◽  
Scaffold Fabrication ◽  
Simultaneous Control ◽  
Scaffold Structure ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Natural Tissue

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has been emerging as a new technology for scaffold fabrication to overcome the problems associated with the undesirable microstructure associated with the use of traditional methods. Solvent-based extrusion (SBE) 3D printing is a popular 3D printing method, which enables incorporation of cells during the scaffold printing process. The scaffold can be customized by optimizing the scaffold structure, biomaterial, and cells to mimic the properties of natural tissue. However, several technical challenges prevent SBE 3D printing from translation to clinical use, such as the properties of current biomaterials, the difficulties associated with simultaneous control of multiple biomaterials and cells, and the scaffold-to-scaffold variability of current 3D printed scaffolds. In this review paper, a summary of SBE 3D printing for tissue engineering (TE) is provided. The influences of parameters such as ink biomaterials, ink rheological behavior, cross-linking mechanisms, and printing parameters on scaffold fabrication are considered. The printed scaffold structure, mechanical properties, degradation, and biocompatibility of the scaffolds are summarized. It is believed that a better understanding of the scaffold fabrication process and assessment methods can improve the functionality of SBE-manufactured 3D printed scaffolds.

scholarly journals Modelos en GeoGebra para el plano y el espacio. Impresión de materiales 3D para su uso en el aula

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-146
Author(s):  
Gustavo Daniel Aguilar
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Mathematical Education ◽  
Student Comprehension ◽  
3D Printers ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Printed Materials ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Model Structures

RESUMENÚltimamente las impresoras 3D se han vuelto más accesibles a los usuarios y los usos de este tipo de impresoras se han multiplicado. Es una nueva tecnología que seguramente va a ser muy utilizada en los tiempos venideros y es de orden para los docentes investigar y reflexionar sobre los posibles usos de esta tecnología en el aula. Hace un tiempo que trabajo con la modelización de estructuras en dos dimensiones, pues ayuda a mis alumnos a comprender de mejor manera la interacción de la matemática en su vida cotidiana. Además de ser motivante y tener un gran contenido de funciones y cálculo, dos partes del currículo que siempre son muy abstractas y que necesitan ser acercadas a la realidad de nuestros alumnos para su mejor comprensión. En este artículo se comentará una experiencia didáctica y también se mostrará de qué manera se pueden usar las herramientas de GeoGebra para modelar estructuras, las cuales pueden ser impresas en 2 y 3 dimensiones. Luego se mostrará como imprimir estas estructuras desde GeoGebra, comentando algunas dificultades que he encontrado, y se hablará de otros usos para las impresiones 3D en el aula de Matemática.  Palabras claves: GeoGebra; Educación Matemática; Modelización, Impresiones 3D RESUMOUltimamente, as impressoras 3D tornaram-se mais acessíveis aos usuários e os usos desse tipo de impressoras têm-se multiplicado. Trata-se de uma nova tecnologia que será certamente muito utilizada nos próximos tempos pelo qual é preciso que os professores investiguem e reflitam sobre as possíveis utilizações desta tecnologia na sala de aula. Há algum tempo que trabalho com a modelação de estruturas bidimensionais, pois ajuda os meus alunos a compreenderem melhor a interação da matemática na sua vida quotidiana. Além de ser emocionante e ter um alto conteúdo de funções e cálculos, duas partes do currículo que são sempre muito abstratas e que precisam de ser aproximadas à realidade de nossos estudantes para a sua melhor compreensão. Este artigo irá comentar uma experiência de ensino e também mostrar como utilizar as ferramentas do GeoGebra para modelar estruturas, que podem ser impressas em 2 e 3 dimensões. Em seguida, é apresentado como imprimir essas estruturas a partir do GeoGebra, comentando algumas dificuldades que se encontrou, e vai se discutir outros usos para a impressão em 3D na aula de matemática.Palavras-chave: GeoGebra; Educação Matemática; Modelagem, Impressões 3D ABSTRACTLately 3D printers became cheaper and accessible to all users. Also there are many fields in which these kinds of printers are being used and this uses will surely develop in the near future. This is a new technology that will be used more and more and it is necessary for teachers to reflect and investigate over the possible uses of this technology in class. Some time ago, I started working with modeling real life 2 dimensional objects in the Maths class because it makes students realize the interaction between Mathematics and their life. In addition, it makes studying calculus more motivating and enhances student comprehension over such an abstract and unrelated topic to their life.  This are the reasons why in this article I will comment on a didactic experience and I  will explain how to use GeoGebra´s tools to model structures in 2 and 3 dimensions. Also I will show how to print these structures from GeoGebra, commenting on some difficulties I found, and I will comment over other uses for 3D printed materials in the maths class. Keywords:  GeoGebra; Mathematical education; 3D printing, Modeling.

ANISOTROPIC MATERIAL BEHAVIORS OF 3D PRINTED CARBON-FIBER POLYMER COMPOSITES WITH OPEN-SOURCE PRINTERS

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Jordan Garcia ◽  
Robert Harper ◽  
Y. Charles Lu
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Carbon Fiber ◽  
3D Printing ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Polymer Composites ◽  
Mechanical Responses ◽  
Manufacturing Technique ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Traditional Manufacturing

Abstract Composite products are often created using traditional manufacturing methods such as compression or injection molding. Recently, additive manufacturing (3D printing) techniques have been used for fabricating composites. 3D printing is the process of producing three-dimensional parts through the successive combination of various layers of material. This layering effect in combination with exposure to ambient (or reduced) temperature and pressure cause the finished products to have inconsistent microstructures. The inconsistent microstructures along with the oriented reinforcing fibers create anisotropic parts with difficulty to predict mechanical properties. In this paper, the mechanical properties of fiber reinforced polymer composites produced by additive manufacturing technique (3D printing) and by traditional manufacturing technique (compression molding) were investigated. Three open-source 3D printers, i.e. FlashForge Dreamer, Tevo Tornado, and Prusa i3 Mk3, were used to fabricate bending samples from carbon-fiber reinforced ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene). Results showed that there exist significant discrepancies and anisotropies in mechanical properties of 3D printed composites. First, the properties vary greatly among parts made from different printers. Secondly, the mechanical responses of 3D printed parts strongly depend upon the orientations of the filaments. Parts with the infill oriented along the length of the specimens showed the most favorable mechanical responses such as Young's modulus, maximum strength, and toughness. Thirdly, all 3D printed parts exhibit inferior properties to those made by conventional manufacturing. Finally, theoretical modeling has been attempted to predict the mechanical responses of 3D printed products and can be used to “design” the 3D printing processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document