Topology-Optimized Implants: Medical Requirements and Partial Aspects of a Design Engineering Process Chain

Neugebauer, Reimund; Rotsch, Christian; Scherer, S.; Werner, Michael; Böhm, A.; Töppel, Thomas; Bräunig, Jan; Senf, Björn

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24491-9_4

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Topological optimisation has been widely explored as an approach to redesigning parts for AM to make use of this design freedom, within a given design space. Typically such techniques are free to attain any shape within loading constraints, however within a biomedical context it is key to consider the anatomical site, and resulting overall shape of an implant as a constraint [97]. Optimisation methods often rely upon a theoretical variation of material behaviour within this envelope for modelling purposes, for example reducing the local density of material where appropriate to reduce stiffness [98], or varying material composition [99].…”

Section: Macroscale Implant Design For Stress Shieldingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical, industrial, and research perspectives on powder bed fusion additively manufactured metal implants

Lowther

Louth

Davey

et al. 2019

Additive Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TFor over ten years, metallic skeletal endoprostheses have been produced in select cases by additive manufacturing (AM) and increasing awareness is driving demand for wider access to the technology. This review brings together key stakeholder perspectives on the translation of AM research; clinical application, ongoing research in the field of powder bed fusion, and the current regulatory framework. The current clinical use of AM is assessed, both on a mass-manufactured scale and bespoke application for patient specific implants. To illuminate the benefits to clinicians, a case study on the provision of custom cranioplasty is provided based on prosthetist testimony. Current progress in research is discussed, with immediate gains to be made through increased design freedom described at both meso-and macro-scale, as well as long-term goals in alloy development including bioactive materials. In all cases, focus is given to specific clinical challenges such as stress shielding and osseointegration. Outstanding challenges in industrialisation of AM are openly raised, with possible solutions assessed. Finally, overarching context is given with a review of the regulatory framework involved in translating AM implants, with particular emphasis placed on customisation within an orthopaedic remit. A viable future for AM of metal implants is presented, and it is suggested that continuing collaboration between all stakeholders will enable acceleration of the translation process. fection or surgical complications [11][12][13].Currently, the majority of skeletal endoprostheses are produced from titanium (Ti) or cobalt chromium (CoCr) based alloys, which meet the criteria of durability, strength, corrosion resistance and a low immune response [14,15]. These characteristics however come at the cost of the high stiffness of these alloys in comparison to bone. Mismatch between the mechanical properties of bone and orthopaedic materials

show abstract

Section: Macroscale Implant Design For Stress Shieldingmentioning

confidence: 99%