2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103561
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bionic design and verification of 3D printed PEEK costal cartilage prosthesis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They also observed mechanical outcome difference between the four different types of FFF materials. Moreover, Zhang et al 38 3D printed a PEEK costal cartilage prothesis with PEEK which provided comparable tensile strength (0.7–8.3 MPa) to the natural costal cartilage (4–7 MPa). Likewise, Wang et al 3 3D printed PEEK rib prosthesis for chest reconstruction and reported that 3D printed implant's tensile strength was 91% of the traditionally manufactured material.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…They also observed mechanical outcome difference between the four different types of FFF materials. Moreover, Zhang et al 38 3D printed a PEEK costal cartilage prothesis with PEEK which provided comparable tensile strength (0.7–8.3 MPa) to the natural costal cartilage (4–7 MPa). Likewise, Wang et al 3 3D printed PEEK rib prosthesis for chest reconstruction and reported that 3D printed implant's tensile strength was 91% of the traditionally manufactured material.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these studies, two printed cuboids, 36,39 one used disk samples and indicated the possibility for dental applications, 40 and one printed dental inlays 35 . There are four studies which explored FFF PAEKs for chest wall reconstruction, which included anterior chest wall construction, 3 costal cartilage, 38 rib, 2 and scapula prosthesis 43 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a 3-dimensional printing method for PEEK implants. Compared to traditional injection molding, it offers certain advantages such as simplified processes, improved timeliness, lower costs, and the ability to create a customized prosthesis to match the bone defect site [ 10 , 11 ]. Current studies have suggested that pore sizes larger than 100 μm can provide sufficient space for vascularization, nutrients supply, waste removal, and oxygen diffusion [ 12 ], and the recommended interconnected macropore structures of 300–500 μm are better for adequate capillary and bone ingrowth [ 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[12,13] Combining with 3D printing (3DP) technology, skeletal and individual PEEK implants were made to repair the chest wall defect in our previous studies. [5,[14][15][16] Up to now, more than 100 3DP PEEK implants have been used in our hospital. Unfortunately, some side effects of PEEK implants have been gradually realized in several years after clinical practices.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%