Aug 05, 2024 Last Thursday’s event focusing on 3D-printed orthopedic implants was eye-opening. By design, the event intends to provide education and organic discussion by international influencers with 3D printing, biomaterials, and regulatory and clinical expertise. The outcome of such talks based on the 3DHEALS virtual event format is often unpredictable, insightful, and inspirational at the same time. This event was no exception. Here are my quick after-thoughts on what I have learned and a few video clips. However, please don’t take my word for it. If you are a serious 3D-printed medical device maker or entrepreneur, you should bookmark this event and use it as a future reference.
Speed is the Game.
Dr. Bryan Scheer, orthopedic surgeon, serial entrepreneur, CEO, and co-founder of SiNAPTIC Technologies, said the quicker the patient can get treatment/repair and heal, the better the clinical outcomes. That means the speed at which the device is ready for implantation, even if not custom-made. This also means the post-processing and design of 3D-printed devices must take “speed” into consideration. The value of a patient-specific implant is still up in the air because the clinical outcomes for some of the PSI are not clearly superior yet. That said, for complex and especially revisional orthopedic cases, Dr. Harry Hothi demonstrated a clear example that 3D-printed personalized devices have a clear advantage.
Why 3D printing?
Jennifer Palinchik, President and Co-Founder of JALEX Medical, LLC, who regularly consults for 3D-printed titanium implant device companies, clarifies why some device makers should consider 3D printing in one simple slide. With these advantages of new technology, however, there are trade-offs, including a new regulatory pathway that can be complex and expensive to navigate. That said however, Jennifer mapped out steps to take a new 3d printed implant from idea to implementation.
Will bioceramics eat the world?
Our event sponsor, Himed, who established the new Bioceramics Center of Excellence for 3D-printed ceramic implants, believes so.
Bryan Scheer’s new startup (SiNAPTIC) also focuses on a form of bioceramics: silicon nitrite. While most current orthopedic implants are made of metal/titanium, bioceramic implants have many advantages. These include high cell adhesion, enhanced osteoconductivity, superior bacterial resistance, reduced bacterial adhesion, and radio-opaque for imaging follow-ups. If you want to learn more about silicone nitride, here is a reference you can read more about. SiNAPTIC Technology is currently working on foot and ankle implants made with silicon nitrite.
Does 3D-printed porosity (and defects) matter?
The answer is nuanced.
Dr. Hothi, who has published extensively in the space with his collaborators at Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital (RNOH) NHS Trust, shared some of the results from his work on 3D-printed hip implants. While there is no conclusion on which type of lattice design will produce better osteointegration, many speakers chimed in that both 3D printing and lattice design serve many other benefits beyond just osteointegration. I am personally motivated to read all of Dr. Hothi’s publications in the near future.
The rise of “metamaterial”?
In the forward-looking part of the discussion, speakers discussed future “smart” biomaterials, implant design with cellular components or functionalities, and sensor-embedded implants. While Jennifer Palinchik knew the regulatory pathway would be particularly challenging, this idea energized the panel and is likely to be a focus of future innovations in the implant space.
Related Links:
3D Bioprinting Biofabrication for Musculoskeletal Tissues (On Demand, 2024)
Best Practices in Central Europe: 3D Printed Maxillofacial Implants (On Demand, 2023)
Event Recap: 3D Bioprinting Biofabricating Skin Components
Event Recap: Point of Care 3D Printing
Event Recap: 3D Printing and AI in Orthopedics
Event Recap: Innovation in Melt-Electrowriting (MEW) & 3D Printing
Comments