Current Biomedical Applications of 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing

Abstract

Additive manufacturing (AM) has emerged over the past four decades as a cost-effective, on-demand modality for fabrication of geometrically complex objects. The ability to design and print virtually any object shape using a diverse array of materials, such as metals, polymers, ceramics and bioinks, has allowed for the adoption of this technology for biomedical applications in both research and clinical settings. Current advancements in tissue engineering and regeneration, therapeutic delivery, medical device fabrication and operative management planning ensure that AM will continue to play an increasingly important role in the future of healthcare. In this review, we outline current biomedical applications of common AM techniques and materials.

An investigation into the effect of changing the computed tomography slice reconstruction interval on the spatial replication accuracy of three‐dimensional printed anatomical models constructed by fused deposition modelling

“…Previously, clinical training and education of health practitioners has relied on the use of human cadavers . Difficulties reported from this approach include the lack of patient‐specific pathological representation and inconsistencies within unique human anatomy . However, the use of models provides realistic and low‐cost alternatives, particularly where financial limitations or cultural considerations impede use .…”

“…However, the use of models provides realistic and low‐cost alternatives, particularly where financial limitations or cultural considerations impede use . Now, clinicians can produce 3D models from patient scan data to improve the diagnosis, visualisation and management of pathology, whilst surgeons may plan and rehearse difficult surgical approaches prior to performing intraoperative surgery . Clinicians can create guides that follow a patient's unique anatomy or fabricate lattice structures on medical implants to promote osseointegration and reduce risk of rejection .…”

“…6 Difficulties reported from this approach include the lack of patientspecific pathological representation and inconsistencies within unique human anatomy. 7,8 However, the use of models provides realistic and low-cost alternatives, particularly where financial limitations or cultural considerations impede use. 6 Now, clinicians can produce 3D models from patient scan data to improve the diagnosis, visualisation and management of pathology, whilst surgeons may plan and rehearse difficult surgical approaches prior to performing intraoperative surgery.…”

“…6 Now, clinicians can produce 3D models from patient scan data to improve the diagnosis, visualisation and management of pathology, whilst surgeons may plan and rehearse difficult surgical approaches prior to performing intraoperative surgery. 1,3,4,7 Clinicians can create guides that follow a patient's unique anatomy or fabricate lattice structures on medical implants to promote osseointegration and reduce risk of rejection. 1,3,5,7 Models can be used to educate patients and their families about an upcoming surgery or to communicate the surgical steps to a clinical team.…”

“…1,3,4,7 Clinicians can create guides that follow a patient's unique anatomy or fabricate lattice structures on medical implants to promote osseointegration and reduce risk of rejection. 1,3,5,7 Models can be used to educate patients and their families about an upcoming surgery or to communicate the surgical steps to a clinical team. 5 Finally, this technology can be utilised to create tissue-equivalent anthropomorphic phantoms to refine computed tomography (CT) scan protocols.…”