3D-Printing of Drug-Eluting Implants: An Overview of the Current Developments Described in the Literature

Domsta, Vanessa; Seidlitz, Anne

doi:10.3390/molecules26134066

Cited by 58 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 153 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Implantable devices can be prepared using a wide variety of techniques, including hot-melt extrusion, injection molding, and 3D-printing (A. S. Stewart et al., 2018 ; Domsta & Seidlitz, 2021 ; Z. Wang & Yang, 2021 ). The use of 3D-printing technologies has been widely explored for the manufacture of a wide range of drug delivery systems such as implantable devices, oral dosage forms, or suppositories (Mathew et al., 2019 ; Awad et al., 2020 ; Domínguez-Robles et al., 2020 ; Melocchi et al., 2020 ; S. Stewart et al., 2020 ; S. A. Stewart et al., 2020 ; Borandeh et al., 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-printed implantable devices with biodegradable rate-controlling membrane for sustained delivery of hydrophobic drugs

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implantable drug delivery systems offer an alternative for the treatments of long-term conditions (i.e. schizophrenia, HIV, or Parkinson’s disease among many others). The objective of the present work was to formulate implantable devices loaded with the model hydrophobic drug olanzapine (OLZ) using robocasting 3D-printing combined with a pre-formed rate controlling membrane. OLZ was selected as a model molecule due to its hydrophobic nature and because is a good example of a molecule used to treat a chronic condition schizophrenia. The resulting implants consisted of a poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) implant coated with a poly(caprolactone) (PCL)-based membrane. The implants were loaded with 50 and 80% (w/w) of OLZ. They were prepared using an extrusion-based 3D-printer from aqueous pastes containing 36–38% (w/w) of water. The printing process was carried out at room temperature. The resulting implants were characterized by using infrared spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, thermal analysis, and X-ray diffraction. Crystals of OLZ were present in the implant after the printing process. In vitro release studies showed that implants containing 50% and 80% (w/w) of OLZ were capable of providing drug release for up to 190 days. On the other hand, implants containing 80% (w/w) of OLZ presented a slower release kinetics. After 190 days, total drug release was ca. 77% and ca. 64% for implants containing 50% and 80% (w/w) of OLZ, respectively. The higher PEO content within implants containing 50% (w/w) of OLZ allows a faster release as this polymer acts as a co-solvent of the drug.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-printed implantable devices with biodegradable rate-controlling membrane for sustained delivery of hydrophobic drugs

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3D-printed drug products with different routes of administration have also been previously investigated. Examples are drug-eluting structures [72] and suppositories [73]. To facilitate adequate drug delivery, with any route of administration, various methods can be employed to regulate drug release.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Printing of Pediatric Medication: The End of Bad Tasting Oral Liquids?—A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing of pediatric-centered drug formulations can provide suitable alternatives to current treatment options, though further research is still warranted for successful clinical implementation of these innovative drug products. Extensive research has been conducted on the compliance of 3D-printed drug products to a pediatric quality target product profile. The 3D-printed tablets were of particular interest in providing superior dosing and release profile similarity compared to conventional drug manipulation and compounding methods, such as oral liquids. In the future, acceptance of 3D-printed tablets in the pediatric patient population might be better than current treatments due to improved palatability. Further research should focus on expanding clinical knowledge, providing regulatory guidance and expansion of the product range, including dosage form possibilities. Moreover, it should enable the use of diverse good manufacturing practice (GMP)-ready 3D printing techniques for the production of various drug products for the pediatric patient population.

show abstract

“…Various types of thermoplastic polymers, such as polylactic acid (PLA), poly(lactic-coglycolic acid) (PLGA), polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), polycaprolactone (PCL), poly(hydroxybutyrateco-hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV), and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene have been used for the fabrication of biomedical bone implants [60]. Among these polymers, PLGA, PCL, PLA, and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene-based implants have reached the clinical trial stage [71]. PLA, PLGA, and PCL have even received approval from the US FDA as materials for 3D printing of biomedical implants [72].…”

Section: Thermoplastic Polymer/bioactive Glass Compositementioning

confidence: 99%

Can 3D-Printed Bioactive Glasses Be the Future of Bone Tissue Engineering?

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study, cases of bone fracture or injury have increased to 33.4% in the past two decades. Bone-related injuries affect both physical and mental health and increase the morbidity rate. Biopolymers, metals, ceramics, and various biomaterials have been used to synthesize bone implants. Among these, bioactive glasses are one of the most biomimetic materials for human bones. They provide good mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and osteointegrative properties. Owing to these properties, various composites of bioactive glasses have been FDA-approved for diverse bone-related and other applications. However, bone defects and bone injuries require customized designs and replacements. Thus, the three-dimensional (3D) printing of bioactive glass composites has the potential to provide customized bone implants. This review highlights the bottlenecks in 3D printing bioactive glass and provides an overview of different types of 3D printing methods for bioactive glass. Furthermore, this review discusses synthetic and natural bioactive glass composites. This review aims to provide information on bioactive glass biomaterials and their potential in bone tissue engineering.

show abstract

3D-Printing of Drug-Eluting Implants: An Overview of the Current Developments Described in the Literature

Cited by 58 publications

References 153 publications

3D-printed implantable devices with biodegradable rate-controlling membrane for sustained delivery of hydrophobic drugs

3D-printed implantable devices with biodegradable rate-controlling membrane for sustained delivery of hydrophobic drugs

3D Printing of Pediatric Medication: The End of Bad Tasting Oral Liquids?—A Scoping Review

Can 3D-Printed Bioactive Glasses Be the Future of Bone Tissue Engineering?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About