Foreseeing the microbiology of bespoke 3D-printed medical devices

Three-Dimensional Printing of Medical Devices Used Directly to Treat Patients: A Systematic Review

Until recently, three-dimensional (3D) printing/additive manufacturing has not been used extensively to create medical devices intended for actual clinical use, primarily on patient safety and regulatory grounds. However, in recent years there have been advances in materials, printers, and experience, leading to increased clinical use. The aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review of 3D-printed medical devices used directly in patient treatment. A search of 13 databases was performed to identify studies of 3D-printed medical devices, detailing fabrication technology and materials employed, clinical application, and clinical outcome. One hundred and ten papers describing one hundred and forty medical devices were identified and analyzed. A considerable increase was identified in the use of 3D printing to produce medical devices directly for clinical use in the past 3 years. This is dominated by printing of patient-specific implants and surgical guides for use in orthopedics and orthopedic oncology, but there is a trend of increased use across other clinical specialties. The prevailing material/3D-printing technology used were titanium alloy/electron beam melting for implants, and polyamide/selective laser sintering or polylactic acid/fused deposition modeling for surgical guides and instruments. A detailed analysis across medical applications by technology and materials is provided, as well as a commentary regarding regulatory aspects. In general, there is growing familiarity with, and acceptance of, 3D printing in clinical use.

A review of the manufacturing process and infection rate of 3D-printed models and guides sterilized by hydrogen peroxide plasma and utilized intra-operatively

3D printing in the context of medical application can allow for visualization of patient-specific anatomy to facilitate surgical planning and execution. Intra-operative usage of models and guides allows for real time feedback but ensuring sterility is essential to prevent infection. The additive manufacturing process restricts options for sterilisation owing to temperature sensitivity of thermoplastics utilised for fabrication. Here, we review one of the largest single cohorts of 3D models and guides constructed from Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and utilized intra-operatively, following terminal sterilization with hydrogen peroxide plasma. We describe our work flow from initial software rendering to printing, sterilization, and on-table application with the objective of demonstrating that our process is safe and can be implemented elsewhere. Overall, 7% (8/114 patients) of patients developed a surgical site infection, which was not elevated in comparison to related studies utilizing traditional surgical methods. Prolonged operation time with an associated increase in surgical complexity was identified to be a risk factor for infection. Low temperature plasma-based sterilization depends upon sufficient permeation and contact with surfaces which are a particular challenge when our 3D-printouts contain diffusion-restricted luminal spaces as well as hollows. Application of printouts as guides for power tools may further expose these regions to sterile bodily tissues and result in generation of debris. With each printout being a bespoke medical device, it is important that the multidisciplinary team involved in production and application understand potential pitfalls to ensuring sterility as to minimize infection risk.