You are on page 1of 8

One of the latest discovery which has been made is three-dimensional (3D) printing.

The
3D printing industry came to life in the 1980s with the first 3D printing machine which was invented
by Carl Deckard and Joe Beaman (Lipton and Kurman, 2013), ever since that time and the
technology was developing slowly yet steadily. 3D printing is a disruptive technology that makes
changes the way of consumption, creation, and possibly, way of live in the world (Dale, 2014). It
also seems that this technology can be attendant digitisation of manufacturing the third industrial
revolution. According the McKinsey Global Institute report (2013), 3D printing is the creation of 3D
objects from a digital file. This is achieved by laying down successive layers of materials above
each other until the entire object is created. 3D printing technology has found industrial
applications in the automotive and aerospace industries for printing prototypes of car and airplane
parts, in the architectural world for printing structural models, and in the consumer goods industry
for prototype development for companies like Trek and Black and Decker (Gross et al, 2014). One
of the most revolutionary areas where 3D printing has come into play has been in the medical field.
According to Gross and his colleagues (2014), using 3D printing for medical application date back
to the early 2000s, with the production of dental implants and prosthetics. Medical application of 3D
printing can be arranged into range of categories: tissue and organ fabrication; producing
prosthetics, implants, and anatomical models; and pharmaceutical research concerning drug
discovery, delivery, and dosage forms (Dale, 2014). A variety of 3D printing techniques are in use
today, each with its own advantages and drawbacks. This essay shows the benefit sides of 3D
printing in medical applications, referring to production process, cost efficiency, convenience and
customisation.
The greatest advantage that the 3D printers provide in medical applications is the freedom
to produce custom-made medical products and equipments. Dale (2014) states that the areas
where customisation would be used are orthopaedics and implants. The ability to vastly produce

custom implants and prostheses solves a clear and constant problem in orthopaedics, where
standard implants are often not fit for some patients, particularly in complex cases. This idea is
supported by Mills (2015), he suggests that 3D printing can address the issues of cost and
customisation with prosthetic designs. Also, he claims that this prothetic can be specified to the
patient and conformable to the unique needs of individuals. Hearing aids illustrates this point
clearly. Additive manufacturing, general terminology for 3D printing techniques, has had enormous
effect in the production of hearing aids (Banks, 2013). Banks (2013) found that about 99% of
hearing aids that suitable to the ear are created by using 3D printing. The features like everyones
ear canal is a different shape and 3D printer can produce customised devices make this example
a notable (Banks, 2013). This is also true, according to Banks (2013), in neurosurgery: skulls have
irregular shapes, so it is hard to standardise a cranial implant. In victims of head injury, where bone
is removed to give the brain room to ripple, the cranial plate that is later fitted must be perfect
(Ventola, 2014). As result of this, in 2013 Oxford Performance Materials received FDA approval for
a 3D-printed polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) skull implant and that year it was first successfully
used and implanted.
Also, customised feature of 3D printing is very essential in bioprinting tissues and organs
because, according Schubert (2014) research, in 2014 in the U.S., approximately 120,000 people
were awaiting an organ transplant and that organ transplantation involves the often difficult task of
finding a donor who is a tissue match. The ability to customise a 3D printed scaffold for tissue
regeneration allows for individualised treatment while avoiding the need to sample from the
patients own tissue for scaffold formation (Gross et al, 2014). This interpretation contrast with that
of Ventola (2014) who maintains that 3D can build a replacement organ by taking cells from the
organ transplant patients own body and using these cells to create tissue matching. According to
Huang and Zhang (2014) the USA academia have started the study about 3D bio-printing in 2012

and as result of this study blood vessels and vascular networks, bones, and ears are successfully
printed. In 2014, researchers successfully and without adverse effect implanted a 3D printed skull
component. This case and others provide the concept of personalised medicine.
Another important benefit offered by 3D printing is the ability to produce items cheaply.
Dale(2014) claims that 3D printer can make traditionally extraordinarily expensive prosthetics much
lower cost. Lipton and Kurman (2013) doubted that the 3D prothetic prints can be cheap, because
it involves a unique custom shaped, small bath production and materials. However, Schubert
(2014) research argues by claiming that the cost to configure a 3D object is minimal, because the
price of the initial item is the same as the final one. Hence, 3D printing is ideal for making one of a
kind items at cost-effective prices (Schubert, 2014). For example, Schubert (2014) suggest how
this method can be used to quickly screen new possible therapeutic drugs on 3D printed patient
tissue, notably reducing costs and time. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness of 3D printing is
particularly true for small sized implants or prosthetics, such as those used for spinal, dental, or
craniofacial disorders (Ventola, 2014). For example, there is an article about how a father printed a
prosthetic hand for his son: Paul McCarthy could not afford to purchase a prosthetic hand for his
son, the cost would have been in the tens of thousands of dollars. So, using open source directions
and a borrowed 3D printer, McCarthy printed a hand for his son for only several dollars (Huff Post,
2013). This is certainly true in the case of a doctor who participated in humanitarian aid in Gaza
used 3D printing to create low-cost medical devices. For example, instead of $200 traditionally
manufactured stethoscope is replaced by $0.30 cent stethoscope which has even better sound
quality (Molitch-Hou, 2015).
Time in the production industry is one of the important issues. In 3D printing, this means
that a product can be made within several hours. Ventola (2014) states that this makes 3D printing
technology much quicker than conventional methods of producing items such as prosthetics and

implants. This feature was also identified by the report (the McKinsey Global Institute, 2013) which
noted that with 3D printing, an idea can go directly from a file on a designers computer to a
finished product, skipping many conventional manufacturing steps such as purchasing of individual
parts, creation of parts using forms or assembly line. Khanna and et al (2015) claim that this hightech technology is broadly used in medical devices manufactures for producing clinical trial ready

products straight from the digital data. This provides a reduction of price and time of production.
Furthermore, they suggest that, 3D printing is considered for surgical visualisation of complex
cases. This could contribute to the decrease of the surgeries duration and, also, help to avoid or
manage any threat of trauma for patient. Khanna and et al (2015) demonstrate as example he
Childrens Hospital of Illinois, Peoria, that has its own 3D printer, which is used to print practice
models for paediatric surgeries.
In some production, the consumption of restricted amount of raw material is beneficial in the
financial perspective and the consumer side. So, there is the another edge of 3D printing is less
material wastage. Lipton and Kurman (2013) consider that 3D printing can reduce the amount of
material wasted in manufacturing. In agreement with Lipton and Kurman, Banks (2013) content that
3D printing uses the material needed to make the product without extra materials. He maintains
that this process also is environmentally friendly because it is an additive process and not a
subtractive process. The McKinsey Global Institute report (2013) distinguished 3D printing as the
technology which has the potential to address concerns about the waste and environmental
impact of traditional manufacturing processes and supply chains. While Khanna and et al (2015)
underline the cruciality of 3D printing in the replacement expensive and rare implant material on the
example of titanium alloys. They also supported the idea that, this technology excludes the
necessity for expensive supplementary tooling and reduces some manufacturing steps. In
consequence, there are material and time safety.

The 3D printing offers another beneficial creature as the democratisation of the design and
manufacturing of goods. An increasing range of materials is available for use 3D printing, and they
are dropping down in cost. This allows more people, including those in medical fields, to use a little
more than a 3D printer and their imaginations to design and produce novel products for personal or
commercial use (Ventola, 2014). Since 2006, two open-source 3D printers have become avail- able
to

the

general

public,

Fab@Home

(www.fabathome.org)

and

RepRap

(www.reprap.org/wiki/RepRap) (Ventola, 2014). The availability of these open-source printers


shrink the barrier of entry for people who want to explore and develop new ideas for 3D printing.
The data files for 3D printing also offer an unprecedented potential for exchanging among
researchers (Gross et al, 2014). They believe that instead of reproducing parameters that are
described in scientific journals, researchers can access downloadable files and use a 3D printer to
create an exact replica of a medical model or device. This can allow the precise sharing of designs
of medical investigations. For example, the National Institutes of Health established the 3D Print
Exchange (3dprint.nih.gov) in 2014 to promote open-source sharing of 3D print files for medical
and anatomical models (Ventola, 2014).
Despite the many potential advantages that 3D may provide, there are some barriers and
controversies to fully integration of 3D printing into healthcare system. The first one, possibly, is
safety or security. According to Ventola (2014), 3D printers have already been used for printing
illegal items, such as guns and gun magazines, master keys, and ATM skimmers.These
circumstances have underlined as the lack of regulation of 3D printing technology. In theory, 3D
printing could also be employed to forge medical devices or medications. The lack of regulation
issue also relates to patent, industrial design, copyright, and trademark law (Ventola, 2014). Lipton
and Kurman (2013) observed that, limitations of 3D printing, which vary by printing technique,

include relatively slow build speed, limited object size, limited object detail or resolution, high
materials cost, and, in some cases, limited object strength.
To conclude, 3D printing has faced several limitation and barriers. However, in recent years
rapid progress has been made in reducing these limitations. Moreover, 3D printing has several
advantages over conventional construction methods. There are the main advantages are offered by
3D printer in the medical field, custom-made product, capital, time and material saving and
democratisation of design and manufacturing. 3D Printing enables device manufacturers to create
personalised devices with multiple integrated features, at reduced costs. It can also drive a marked
decrease in processing costs as well as time, and will allow manufacturers to justify premium
pricing to the consumer by building on the perceived value of personalisation and create platform to
realise other break storms in medical field.

Bibliography

Banks, J., 2013. Adding value in additive manufacturing: Researchers in the United Kingdom and
Europe look to 3D printing for customisation. IEEE Pulse, 4(6), pp.2226.

Dale Prience, J., 2014. 3D Printing: An Industrial Revolution. Journal of Electronic Resources in
Medical Libraries, 11(1), pp.39-45.

Gross, B.C. et al., 2014. Evaluation of 3D printing and its potential impact on biotechnology and the
chemical sciences. Analytical Chemistry [Online], 86(7), pp.32403253.

Huang, W. and Zhang, Z., 2014. 3D Printing: Print the Future of Ophthalmology. Investigative
Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 55(8), pp. 5380-5381

Huff Post, 2013. Dad Uses 3D Printer to Make His Son a Prosthetic Hand. Huff Post , November 4,
Available

from:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/04/dad-prints-prosthetic-hand-leon-

mccarthy_n_4214217.html [Accessed: 25 August 2015].

Khanna, A. et al., 2015. 3D Printing: New Opportunities for the Medical Devices Industry. TCS Life
Sciences.

Lipson, H. and Kurman, M., 2013. Fabricated The new world of 3D printing. Indianapolis: John
Wiley & Sons.

McKinsey Global Institute, 2013. Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life,
business, and the global economy. San Fransico: McKinsey & Company

Mills, D.K., 2015. 3-D Printing Gets Personal. Medical Device and Diagnostics Industry, 37(1),
pp.26-30.

Molitch-Hou, M., 2015. Doctor Brings Low-Cost Medical Supplies to Gaza with 3D Printing. 3D
print industry, August 14, Available from: http://3dprintingindustry.com/2015/08/14/doctor-bringsmedical-supplies-to-gaza-with-3d-printing/ [Accessed: 26 August 2015]

Schubert, C., van Langeveld, M.C. and Donoso, L.A., 2014. Innovations in 3D printing: a 3D
overview from optics to organs. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 98(2), pp.159161.

Ventola, C.L., 2014. Medical Applications for 3D Printing: Current and Projected Uses. Pharmacy &
Therapeutics, 39(10), pp.704-711.

You might also like