The media continues to highlight the impact of 3D printing on patient care on local and national newscasts, and many have taken a social media approach to publicize the impact on this new, innovative way to deliver medical data. However, until recently, a single healthcare organization leader has not emerged as home to release technologies, to disseminate the peer review literature, to manage the roles and future responsibilities of 3D printing in education, and to lead discussions with regulatory bodies geared for reimbursement. This, in turn, has left much of the responsibilities of current development and direction to the manufacturers, in response to individual medical and dental requests.
At the forefront of this entire process is medical imaging and dental imaging, as radiology and applied imaging science professionals largely manage the studies that identify patient-specific anatomical areas of interest for design and fabrication of customized models, surgical guides, and medical devices that are 3D printed. Moreover, much of 3D printing is from medical images, and several of the more complex steps, where errors can be introduced, is in image post-processing. Over the last few decades, a revolutionary biomedical research field has gained a tremendous attention as a multidisciplinary scientific domain to create therapeutic substitutes for replacing, repairing, or regenerating defective, diseased, or missing tissue and organ for effective transplantation.
History of 3D Printing in Medicine
In the mid-1990s, groups from Canada, Wales, German, and the United States (USA), as well as the US military, began to experiment with the use of 3D printing for head and neck reconstruction. as a collaborative organization known as the Advanced Digital Technologies Foundation (www.adtfoundation.com). With the help of the software company Materialise (Leuven, Belgium), they were able to convert DICOM images into a Standard Tessellation Language (STL) file to 3D print. Early images were of bones, for example, the skull, and these models changed the fabrication techniques for cranial implants. In the mid-1990s, Medical Modeling of Golden Colorado under the leadership of Andy Christensen offered a commercial service for medical models, surgical guides, and customized devices used by both healthcare professionals and the commercial medical industry.
3D printing for producing a cellular construct was first introduced in 2003 when Thomas Boland of Clemson University patented the use of inkjet printing for cells. This process utilized a modified spotting system for the deposition of cells into organized 3D matrices placed on a substrate. More complex organs, namely those that consist of solid cellular structures, are undergoing research; these organs include the heart, pancreas, and kidneys. Anthony Atala, M.D. (born 1958) is the W.H. Boyce Professor and Director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, and Chair of the Department of Urology at Wake Forest School of Medicine in North Carolina. In 2013, the company Organovo produced a human liver using 3D bioprinting, though it is not suitable for transplantation, and has primarily been used as a medium for drug testing.
Current 3D Printing technology
Medical 3D printing centres span both industry and civilian medical centres. There are several service models to obtain printed models, including outsourcing images (e.g., a CT scan or MR images) to vendors such as Materialise who in turn provide consultation and 3D printing. Similarly, recent years have seen collaboration between software and hardware companies, for example, Vital Images and Stratasys, two leaders in their respective fields of 3D visualization and 3D printing hardware, have marketed a service model designed to leverage expertise from both sides to accept auto segmented STL files and provide models. Many medical centres have begun to emulate the organization and infrastructure from the Mayo Clinic, capitalizing on the medical expertise in house and assembling the physical and human resources needed for a functioning lab. These are detailed in a chapter in this book, based on the laboratory at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Medicine. Education has provided a bridge to other centres. Beginning in 2013, the RSNA has hosted didactic sessions in 3D printing, and for the past several years, hands-on courses have been available, with the number of students in these teaching sessions exceeding 1000. To meet the needs of medical 3D printing, the manufacturers such as 3D Systems and Stratasys have begun to develop printers that provide the ability to print open vessels, different colours, and a variety of materials. For more than a dozen years, the medical sector has been featured at the Society of Mechanical Engineers (SME) RAPID meeting. Finally, workgroups within the SME have begun to engage with the community, in particular, to work, as other groups have, to look at medical reimbursement. Comments on these important discussions are also covered in later chapters. 3D printing is truly one of the leading technologies of our time; we hope that this book will provide essential information and that it will help you understand the impact that 3D printing can have on medicine in the hopes of improving the outcomes and quality of life for many patients around the world. Finally, we genuinely believe that the leaders in the next generation of 3D printing will be reading this book and that we can inspire others to enter the field and make gainful contributions.
Three central approaches to bioprinting are biomimicry, autonomous self-assembly, and a microtissue-based method. These general strategies are not exclusive to bioprinting and are broadly applied to many investigational areas within the larger scope of regenerative medicine. In many cases, these are used for tissue engineering applications unrelated to bioprinting. However, a discussion of these fundamental strategies is necessary when considering the optimal approach to bioprinting objectives. Each of these may applied to specific bioprinting applications to varying degrees based on factors such as target tissue type, user experience, and printing method. It is not uncommon to combine strategies for more complex tissue. So, I need to talk about the utilization of 3D - bioprinting in Organ manufacture and distinctive strategies in my next blog.
Reference:
1.Tanveer ahmad mir et al., tissue engineering: part b volume 23, number 3, 2017
2. 3D Printing of Human Organs — Future Perspective & IP Scenario, Aracna Published on 25 May, 2016
3. Jinah Jang, 3D Bioprinting and In Vitro Cardiovascular Tissue Modeling, Bioengineering 2017, 4, 71.
4. Israel Valverde.Three-dimensional Printed Cardiac Models: Heart Interventions, REC-3108; No. of Pages 10
5. Frank J. Rybicki • Gerald T. Grant, 3D Printing in Medicine,chapter.3 page No.25-34.
Comments
Post a Comment