| Literature DB >> 35542139 |
Chaohua Gao1, Chenyu Wang1,2, Hui Jin1, Zhonghan Wang1, Zuhao Li1, Chenyu Shi1,3, Yi Leng1, Fan Yang1, He Liu1, Jincheng Wang1.
Abstract
Traditional metallic scaffold prostheses, as vastly applied implants in clinical orthopedic operations, have achieved great success in rebuilding limb function. However, mismatch of bone defects and additional coating requirements limit the long-term survival of traditional prostheses. Recently, additive manufacturing (AM) has opened up unprecedented possibilities for producing complicated structures in prosthesis shapes and microporous surface designs of customized prostheses, which can solve the drawback of traditional prostheses mentioned above. This review presents the most commonly used metallic additive manufacturing techniques, the microporous structure design of metallic scaffolds, and novel applications of customized prostheses in the orthopedic field. Challenges and future perspectives on AM fabricated scaffolds are also summarized. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 35542139 PMCID: PMC9082573 DOI: 10.1039/c8ra04815k
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Scheme of metallic 3D printing techniques and design of metallic prostheses with regards to clinical applications in orthopedics.
Fig. 2The schematic of main components and working process in different metallic AM systems: (a) SLM, (b) binder jetting (c) EBM system (d) LENS system and (e) UAM welding system. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 26–30 with permission from http://www.custompartnet.com and http://www.arcam.com.
The techniques of metallic additive manufacturing and the process principle, parameters, advantages and disadvantages
| Techniques | Process principle | Parameters | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLM | A thin layer of powders can be selectively melt using laser beam layer by layer. | Layer thickness: 30–100 μm | Complex shapes manufacturing, high mechanical properties, high accuracy, high material utilization, and net shape ability. | Time-consuming (difficult in large-scale manufacturing), high residual stress. |
| Smallest feature: 50–200 μm | ||||
| SEBM | A thin layer of powders can be selectively melt using electron beam, which is repeated for each layer. | Layer thickness: 50–150 μm | Complex shapes manufacturing, low residual stress, high mechanical properties, high accuracy, time-saving. | High surface roughness, smoke events. |
| Smallest feature: ∼100 μm | ||||
| LENS | Powders are delivered to the laser beam, melted and deposited onto a substrate. This system is controlled by the CAD models until the part is produced. | This system can control speed, accuracy, and property by tailoring deposition parameters. | Complex shapes manufacturing, net shape ability, high mechanical properties, high accuracy. | High surface roughness, time-consuming |
| Binder jetting | A layer of powder is spread and then binder is deposited on the layer through CAD model. This process is repeated until part is produced. | Layer thickness: 20–100 μm | Cost-effective, high efficiency, no residual stress. | Shrinkage, poor quality, surface finish, low mechanical properties. |
| Smallest feature: 350–500 μm | ||||
| UAM | This process can join metal sheets based on CAD design using ultrasonic energy. Then excess part is trimmed out using CNC machine. | Layer thickness: ∼100 μm | Large-scale parts, good surface finish, low geometric distortion and low costs. | Poor geometric accuracy, poor in complex overhangs, poor in shear and tensile loading conditions. |
Fig. 3(A) Images of live/dead staining and SEM images in the horizontal and vertical planes of cells on six porous Ti6Al4V scaffold designs. (B) DNA assay, and metabolic and ALP activity of cells on different porous Ti6Al4V scaffold designs cultured in GM or OM. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 117 with permission from Elsevier.
Fig. 4Software (CAD) models incorporating inner and outer foam elements. (a) Three-dimensional, (b) three-dimensional half-section and (c) end views, respectively. (d) Femoral prototype with mesh elements. (e) The inner foam and outer mesh elements for a femoral prototype (half-section view). (f) SEBM-fabricated femoral implant with porous structure similar to (a). This figure has been reproduced from ref. 132 with permission from The Royal Society.
Fig. 5Schematic of basic steps for implant fabrication based on 3DP system: (a) data collection from CT and MRI; (b) implant design in computer for 3D CAD model and topology optimization; (c–e) implant fabrication in 3DP system using metal powder; (f) application in medical field. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 177 with permission from International Scientific Information.
Fig. 6(a–c) Lesion and its boundary located in the preoperative X-ray and MRI. (d) After resection of the posterior C2 elements and fixation in the lateral X-ray. (e) Model showed that how the 3D vertebral body was inserted between C1 and C3 in the second surgery. (f and g) Anteroposterior and lateral X-ray after the second surgery. (h) Sagittal reconstruction after surgery and (i) at the 1 year follow-up demonstrating implant osseointegration without implant failure and local recurrence of the tumor. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 162 with permission from Wolters Kluwer.
Fig. 7(a and b) Lesion and its boundary located in the MRI and CT. (c and d) The 3D pelvic model showed the implant reconstruction and screws fixation. (e) The outer view showed the acetabular cup with screws holes for fixation. (f) The back side showed the porous structure that was in contact to bone. (g and h) After tumor resection, the implant was fitted to the bone defect perfectly and stabilized with screws. (i and j) X-ray showed good implant alignment, and patient could stand with single leg at 10 months after the surgery. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 167 with permission from Taylor & Francis.
Fig. 8(a and b) Lesion and its boundary located in the MRI and CT. (c) The porous structure on the surface of prosthesis. (d and e) The tumor was exposed and resected. Comparing with the proximal tibia prosthesis made of titanium. (f) After tumor resection, the proximal tibia prosthesis was perfectly fitted to the bone defect. This figure has been reproduced from ref. 177 with permission from International Scientific Information, Inc.