Additive manufacturing to veterinary practice: recovery of bony defects after the osteosarcoma resection in canines

Abstract

The paper outlines the achievements and challenges in the additive manufacturing (AM) application to veterinary practice. The state-of-the-art in AM application to the veterinary surgery is presented, with the focus of AM for patient-specific implants manufacturing. It also provides critical discussion on some of the potential issues design and technology should overcome for wider and more effective implementation of additively manufactured parts in veterinary practices. Most of the discussions in present paper are related to the metallic implants, manufactured in this case using so-called powder bed additive manufacturing (PB-AM) in titanium alloy Ti-6AL-4V, and to the corresponding process of their design, manufacturing and implementation in veterinary surgery. Procedures of the implant design and individualization for veterinary surgery are illustrated basing on the four performed surgery cases with dog patients. Results of the replacement surgery in dogs indicate that individualized additively manufactured metallic implants significantly increase chances for successful recovery process, and AM techniques present a viable alternative to amputation in a large number of veterinary cases. The same time overcoming challenges of implant individualization in veterinary practice significantly contributes to the knowledge directly relevant to the modern medical practice. An experience from veterinary cases where organ-preserving surgery with 3D-printed patientspecific implants is performed provides a unique opportunity for future development of better human implants.

Powder-bed additive manufacturing for aerospace application: Techniques, metallic and metal/ceramic composite materials and trends

“…The powder-bed additive manufacturing (PB-AM) unifies several 3D-printing powder-based techniques: selective laser sintering/melting (SLS/SLM), electron beam melting (EBM) and binder jetting printing (BJP). PB-AM is widely used in critical applications like biomedical implants [1,2], automotive [3], and aerospace [3,4].…”

Limb‐sparing in dogs using patient‐specific, three‐dimensional‐printed endoprosthesis for distal radial osteosarcoma: A pilot study

“…Limb‐sparing is most commonly performed for OSA located in the distal radius . Many techniques have been described for this anatomic site: cortical allograft, stainless steel endoprosthesis, distraction osteogenesis by bone transport, intraoperative extracorporeal radiotherapy, tumoral autograft pasteurization, microvascular ulnar autograft, ulnar rollover transposition, limb shortening, lateral manus translation, and patient‐specific, three‐dimensional (3D)‐printed endoprosthesis …”

“…Patient‐specific implants allow the implants to fit as perfectly as possible for each patient and therefore optimizing the loads transmitted through the limb. Patient‐specific implants are possible through computer‐aided design and 3D printing technology . This has the potential to reduce complications, particularly implant‐related complications .…”

“…[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Many techniques have been described for this anatomic site: cortical allograft, [6][7][8][15][16][17] stainless steel endoprosthesis, 8,9 distraction osteogenesis by bone transport, 14,18 intraoperative extracorporeal radiotherapy, 12,19 tumoral autograft pasteurization, 13,20 microvascular ulnar autograft, 21 ulnar rollover transposition, 10,21,22 limb shortening, 23 lateral manus translation, 11 and patient-specific, three-dimensional (3D)-printed endoprosthesis. 24,25 The use of a stainless steel endoprosthesis brings the advantage of relative simplicity compared with the use of an allograft (no need for a bone bank or to order an allograft on a case by case basis) and many other limb-sparing techniques. The complication rate however is high.…”

“…Patient-specific implants are possible through computer-aided design and 3D printing technology. 24,25 This has the potential to reduce complications, particularly implant-related complications. 27 One of the most significant disadvantages with patient-specific, 3D-printed implants is the interval between imaging and definitive surgery because of the time required to design and print the individualized implant.…”