Three-dimensional printing versus conventional machining in the creation of a meatal urethral dilator: development and mechanical testing
| Autor: | Jacob Skewes, Nicholas J. Rukin, Maria A. Woodruff, Ryan Daley, Michael Y. Chen |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
3d printed
Materials science lcsh:Medical technology Urology Intermittent urethral catheterisation 030232 urology & nephrology Biomedical Engineering 3D printing 3d printer Biomaterials 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Urethra Machining Urethral dilators Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Urethral stricture Three-dimensional printing Radiological and Ultrasound Technology business.industry Research Equipment Design General Medicine Dilatation lcsh:R855-855.5 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Three dimensional printing Dilator Printing Three-Dimensional Mechanical Tests business Biomedical engineering |
| Zdroj: | BioMedical Engineering OnLine, Vol 19, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2020) BioMedical Engineering |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12938-020-00799-8 |
| Popis: | Background Three-dimensional (3D) printing is a promising technology, but the limitations are often poorly understood. We compare different 3D printing methods with conventional machining techniques in manufacturing meatal urethral dilators which were recently removed from the Australian market. Methods A prototype dilator was 3D printed vertically orientated on a low-cost fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printer in polylactic acid (PLA) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS). It was also 3D printed horizontally orientated in ABS on a high-end FDM 3D printer with soluble support material, as well as on an SLS 3D printer in medical nylon. The dilator was also machined in stainless steel using a lathe. All dilators were tested mechanically in a custom rig by hanging calibrated weights from the handle until the dilator snapped. Results The horizontally printed ABS dilator experienced failure at a greater load than the vertically printed PLA and ABS dilators, respectively (503 g vs 283 g vs 163 g, p Conclusions Low-cost FDM 3D printing is not a replacement for conventional manufacturing. 3D printing is best used for patient-specific parts, prototyping or manufacturing complex parts that have additional functionality that cannot otherwise be achieved. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
| Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje | K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit. |