Literature DB >> 32297041

Identifying a commercially-available 3D printing process that minimizes model distortion after annealing and autoclaving and the effect of steam sterilization on mechanical strength.

Joshua V Chen1, Kara S Tanaka2, Alan B C Dang2,3, Alexis Dang2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fused deposition modeling 3D printing is used in medicine for diverse purposes such as creating patient-specific anatomical models and surgical instruments. For use in the sterile surgical field, it is necessary to understand the mechanical behavior of these prints across 3D printing materials and after autoclaving. It has been previously understood that steam sterilization weakens polylactic acid, however, annealing heat treatment of polylactic acid increases its crystallinity and mechanical strength. We aim to identify an optimal and commercially available 3D printing process that minimizes distortion after annealing and autoclaving and to quantify mechanical strength after these interventions.
METHODS: Thirty millimeters cubes with four different infill geometries were 3D printed and subjected to hot water-bath annealing then immediate autoclaving. Seven commercially available 3D printing materials were tested to understand their mechanical behavior after intervention. The dimensions in the X, Y, and Z axes were measured before and after annealing, and again after subsequent autoclaving. Standard and strength-optimized Army-Navy retractor designs were printed using the 3D printing material and infill geometry that deformed the least. These retractors were subjected to annealing and autoclaving interventions and tested for differences in mechanical strength.
RESULTS: For both the annealing and subsequent autoclaving intervention, the material and infill geometry that deformed the least, respectively, was Essentium PLA Gray and "grid". Standard retractors without intervention failed at 95 N +/- 2.4 N. Annealed retractors failed at 127.3 N +/- 10 N. Autoclave only retractors failed at 15.7 N +/- 1.4 N. Annealed then autoclaved retractors failed at 19.8 N +/- 3.1 N. Strength-optimized retractors, after the annealing then autoclaving intervention, failed at 164.8 N +/- 12.5 N.
CONCLUSION: For 30 mm cubes, the 3D printing material and infill geometry that deformed the least, respectively, was Essentium PLA and "grid". Hot water-bath annealing results in increased 3D printed model strength, however autoclaving 3D prints markedly diminishes strength. Strength-optimized 3D printed PLA Army-Navy retractors overcome the strength limitation due to autoclaving.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D printing; 3D printing materials; Additive manufacturing; Annealing; Autoclave; Medical devices; Optimization; Polylactic acid; Sterilization; Surgical instruments

Year:  2020        PMID: 32297041     DOI: 10.1186/s41205-020-00062-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  3D Print Med        ISSN: 2365-6271


  4 in total

1.  A survey regarding the organizational aspects and quality systems of in-house 3D printing in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany.

Authors:  Alexander-N Zeller; Elisabeth Goetze; Daniel G E Thiem; Alexander K Bartella; Lukas Seifert; Fabian M Beiglboeck; Juliane Kröplin; Jürgen Hoffmann; Andreas Pabst
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2022-08-22

2.  Comparing cost and print time estimates for six commercially-available 3D printers obtained through slicing software for clinically relevant anatomical models.

Authors:  Joshua V Chen; Alan B C Dang; Alexis Dang
Journal:  3D Print Med       Date:  2021-01-06

3.  In-House, Fast FDM Prototyping of a Custom Cutting Guide for a Lower-Risk Pediatric Femoral Osteotomy.

Authors:  Leonardo Frizziero; Gian Maria Santi; Christian Leon-Cardenas; Giampiero Donnici; Alfredo Liverani; Paola Papaleo; Francesca Napolitano; Curzio Pagliari; Giovanni Luigi Di Gennaro; Stefano Stallone; Stefano Stilli; Giovanni Trisolino; Paola Zarantonello
Journal:  Bioengineering (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-26

4.  Utilizing patient-specific 3D printed guides for graft reconstruction in thoracoabdominal aortic repair.

Authors:  Taehun Kim; Dayeong Hong; Junhyeok Ock; Sung Jun Park; Younju Rhee; Sangwook Lee; Guk Bae Kim; Dong Hyun Yang; Joon Bum Kim; Namkug Kim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.