Albert Folch‘s lab works at the interface between 3D-printing, microfluidics and cancer. He received both his BSc (1989) and PhD (1994) in Physics from the University of Barcelona (UB), Spain, in 1989. During his Ph.D. he was a visiting scientist from 1990–91 at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab working on AFM under Dr. Miquel Salmeron. From 1994–1996, he was a postdoc at MIT developing MEMS under Martin Schmidt (EECS) and Mark Wrighton (Chemistry). In 1997, he joined Mehmet Toner’s lab as a postdoc at Harvard-MGH to apply soft lithography to tissue engineering. He has been at Seattle’s UW BioE since June 2000, where he is now a full Professor, accumulating over 11,000 citations. In 20 years, he has supervised 18 postdocs (17% of whom have reached faculty rank), 12 Ph.D. students (25% faculty rank), 15 M.S. students, and >40 undergraduates. In 2001 he received an NSF Career Award, in 2006 a NASA Space Act Award, and in 2014 he was elected to the AIMBE College of Fellows (Class of 2015). He has served on the Advisory Board of Lab on a Chip between 2006-2017 and on the Editorial Board of Micromachines since 2019. He is the sole author of 5 books, including “Introduction to BioMEMS” (2012, Taylor&Francis), a textbook adopted by ~100 departments in 18 countries, and “Hidden in Plain Sight: The History, Science, and Engineering of Microfluidic Technology” (MIT Press, to appear in April 2022). Since 2007, the lab runs a celebrated outreach art program called BAIT (Bringing Art Into Technology), which has produced seven exhibits, a popular resource gallery of >2,000 free images related to microfluidics and microfabrication, and a YouTube channel that plays microfluidic videos with music which accumulates ~157,000 visits since 2009.

Professor will be speaking during our upcoming 3D Printing Microfabrication Event. 

Jenny: When was the first encounter you had with 3D printing? What was that experience like? What were you thinking at that moment?

Albert: A student showed me a brochure from Protolabs (Fineline Prototyping at that moment) that had a picture of a 3D-printed microfluidic device in it. I did not know that 3D-printers were capable of that resolution! It opened my eyes.

Jenny: What inspired you to start your journey in 3D printing (bio-fabrication/bio-printing)?

Albert: The convenience (digital design+automated fabrication) and low cost. As soon as we tried it, we never went back to molding!

Jenny: Who inspired you the most along this journey in 3D printing (bio-printing/bio-fabrication)?  

Albert: My student Anthony Au, who did very creative designs for microfluidics and literally changed the way we do microfluidics in the lab.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Albert Folch (@folch_lab_art)

Jenny: What motivates you the most for your work?

Albert: I like the feeling of learning new things every day and being on the edge of knowledge.

Jenny: What is/are the biggest obstacle(s) in your line of work? If you have conquered them, what were your solutions?

Albert: My lab has two sides, 3D printing (technology) development and cancer assays.

On the technology side, the biggest obstacle right now are the machines: the highest-resolution ones for microfluidics (Dilase3D, 5 micron resolution over a 10 cm x 10 cm area) are too expensive (~$200,000) to be widespread, although we have one here at UW, and can only print in one material at a time. We wish they were down to $10,000 and could print in several materials.

On the cancer side, given that we have learned that cancer is a disease that evolves differently in every individual, we need personalized treatments. We need assays that detect cancer early (for prevention) and treatments that stop cancer when it has spread (metastasis). Right now there are very few treatments for metastatic disease, so I think we should try new strategies because the old tenet that metastasis results from an accumulation of random mutations is not credible.

Jenny: What do you think is (are) the biggest challenge(s) in 3D Printing/bio-printing? What do you think the potential solution(s) is (are)?

Albert: Materials and resolution.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Albert Folch (@folch_lab_art)

Jenny: If you are granted three wishes by a higher being, what would they be?

Albert: Infinite wisdom and absolute happiness – don’t need a third one!

Jenny: What advice would you give to a smart driven college student in the “real world”? What bad advice you heard should they ignore?

Albert: Listen to their own drive! And likewise, do not listen to advice from older people who have lived different lives, live your own passion for learning and you will be the best at what you love to do, or at the very least you will be happy doing it.

Jenny: If you could have a giant billboard to promote a message to millions and even billions of people in our community (i.e. healthcare 3D printing and bio-fabrication), what message would that be?

Albert: The giant billboards exist (LinkedIn/Facebook/YouTube) but I can’t think of anything that would be of interest to so many people at a time unless we can announce that we have cured cancer or something equally important.

Jenny: What were/was the best investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?

Albert: A used Ilios printer I bought from a guy down in Portland and with which we started all our biocompatible resin work – great open-source printer!

Jenny: What were/was the worst investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?

Albert: I forgot 🙂

Jenny: What was/is the biggest risk you took in your career?

Albert: Leaving Barcelona, my hometown

Jenny: What do you enjoy in your spare time? What are you passionate about outside of your work/3d printing?

Albert: Soccer.

Photo credit: Folch Lab

Jenny: What is your favorite quote? Why?

Albert:  I have 3 quotes on top of my desk, and they all emphasize the same motto that there is more to Science than simply accumulating knowledge:

“Imagination is more important than knowledge” (Albert Einstein)

“Research is to see what everyone has seen and think what nobody has thought” (Albert Szent-György)

“There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why – I dream of things that never were, and ask: why not?” (Robert Kennedy)

Jenny: What does the word “3DHEALS” mean to you? =) 

Albert: “3D-Printing can help healthcare”

Related Articles:

3D BioPrinting Skin: Guide

3D Printed Drugs – Guide

Microfluidics, Technology, Commercialization (On Demand)

3D Printing Has Come of Age But How Safe Are the Devices Going Into Our Mouth?

The post Prof. Albert Folch- Beautiful Microfluidics appeared first on 3DHeals.

Dr. Ben Holmes is an entrepreneur, medtech executive, inventor, and scientist. He is the CEO and co-founder of Nanochon, which is commercializing a 3D printed cartilage implant for regenerating lost or damaged cartilage in joints. His academic background is in 3D printing and biomaterials for tissue engineering and regeneration. Ben is also a 3DHEALS community manager in the Washington, D.C. area. Ben will be speaking on the upcoming NAMIC/3DHEALS Startup Showcase.

3DHEALS has recently invested in Nanochon.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by 💡Healthcare 3D Printing💡 (@3dheals)

Jenny: Ben, please tell us a little about you.

Ben: I am an experienced medtech executive, developer, and entrepreneur. I have been a researcher and now a product developer for 3D printed medical devices since 2011. I have successfully led early-stage medical device companies since 2016.

Jenny: Where are you from and what are you working on? 

Ben: I grew up in Northern Virginia. I came to DC in 2009 to study at George Washington University, in Grace Zhang’s tissue engineering lab. When I founded my company in 2016, we stayed in DC to continue a research relationship with GWU and to pursue a collaboration with Children’s National Medical Center. My company Nanochon is developing a 3D printed porous and flexible implant for regenerating damaged cartilage in the knee. We were successful with securing essential development grants, and an SBIR from the National Science Foundation, and we just closed a $2M seed round to continue commercializing the technology.

Jenny: What made you decide to become a 3DHEALS community manager?

Ben: I have always had a passion for 3D printing, and all the unique benefits it can bring to healthcare. I first came into contact with 3DHeals at a conference in Washington DC and was impressed by the experience and passion displayed by the members I met. That motivated me to get more involved and made me want to share this important community with others.

Jenny: What do you think of innovations in healthcare 3D printing or bioprinting? What do you hope to see in the next five years? 10 years?

Ben: I think great progress has been made in the last 10 years, and there have been impressive examples of highly controlled, cell-supporting small-scale structures. I think improving speed and accuracy so these delicate small-scale structures can be produced throughout a large-scale implantable tissue is key. My hope is that new/cutting edge printing technology will be used to print new, biocompatible materials, at greater speeds and volumes.

Jenny: If you have done 3D printing before, what have you made/designed? 

Ben: My company is developing an implant for cartilage repair. It is a disk-like structure roughly the size of a coin, with the thickness of cartilage, designed to re-surface areas of a joint that has lost or damaged cartilage tissue. In my past research, I also used 3D printing to design and print structures for bone and micro-vascular tissues.

Jenny: Most of our community managers are entrepreneurial and adventurous, what risks/adventures have you taken that you’d like to share with us?

Ben: Starting my company! I think especially in the “long-term” implantable device space, there is a lot of clinical and financial risk, and it takes a lot of work before such companies are truly “fundable.” We had great early success with grants and SBIR funding and just closed our first institutional round. My hope is that we can continue to grow and get the funds we need, I think our technology really shines in this space, where there have been many failed attempts,and there is a clear need clinically, I will continue to share my vision with those who have the resources to help us get to the next level.

Jenny: Who would you like to find and include in the 3DHEALS community you are building?

Ben: Other young researchers and entrepreneurs like I was, who need talented and resourceful people to take an interest in them, guide them, and help them succeed. On the other side, I have loved to see the involvement of key industry players in medical 3D printing, and want to see 3D HEALS continue to be a place that can bring entrepreneurs and industry together.

Jenny: What would you like to accomplish with this new 3DHEALS community in the future?

Ben: I think building pipelines for 3D printed technology to get from the lab to the clinic is a must. I would love to see 3D HEALS become the premier networking event for doctors, researchers, investors, and strategic partners in the 3D printing space.

Jenny: What do you think about the innovation environment (for health tech or for general technology) in your city?

Ben: I have been impressed over the last 3-4 years. DC was lacking, when it comes to investors and financing interested in medical devices. But lately, there has been greatly renewed interest, supported largely by talented researchers and clinicains founding companies and staying in the area. I believe there is now a base of high value companies that is attracting investment and resources.

Jenny: What are you most proud of about your city?

Ben: I think DC has made great strides in the last 15-20 years to really become a vibrant and livable community.

Jenny: What are you most proud of about the innovation community in your city?

Ben: DC continues to be a cradle for generating great ideas, and the infrastructure to take them further is growing, supported by investors, industry, and world-class universities.

Jenny: What do you think are the top priorities in healthcare innovations for your city/community?

Ben: Improving patient outcomes through better clinical management and treatment efficiency. DC has in fact been a testbed for companies large and small focused on community health initiatives.

Jenny: What do you hope to accomplish through your role as the 3DHEALS community manager?

Ben: I want to do what I can to help  DC continue to grow and evolve its innovation ecosystem.

Jenny: What do you do for fun?

Ben: Before the pandemic, I enjoyed going to shows and concerts. But I have become sort of outdoorsy, enjoying hiking, camping, and other outdoor adventures. I also love to cook and travel.

Jenny: Anything else?

Ben: I can’t wait to help the DC 3DHEALS community thrive!

Related Articles:

Interview with Prof. Huang Dejian: CEO, Kosmodehealth

Interview with Dr. Wei Jiang GOH: CEO, Crafthealth

Interview with Amrish Nair: CEO, BIORITHM

Interview: Adam Jakus, Chief Technology of DimensionInx

Bone Grafts: Inducing Bone Regeneration with 3D Printed Porosity

3DHEALS2020 Session 17. Biofabrication Ecosystem

Interview with Adam Clark, Tangible Solutions

Bio Fabrication Techniques for Bone and Cartilage Tissue Regeneration

Interview: Professor Adam Feinberg, Carnegie Mellon University, CTO and co-founder FluidForm

The post Interview: Dr. Benjamin Holmes, CEO Nanochon appeared first on 3DHeals.

In 2016, when I co-authored the first edition of ” A Roadmap from Idea to Implementation: 3D Printing for Pre-Surgical Application: Operational Management for 3D Printing in Surgery“, focusing on a systematic thinking process to address these questions by evaluating components of operational management with Michelle Gabriel. However, selling a book is not going to accelerate adaption, instead, I decided to publish this book as a regularly updated online version of 3DHEALS Guide in five digestible parts, focusing on and adding new information from field experts from all over the world to provide a foundation to any early adapters.

The first time I learned about 3D printing (a.k.a. additive manufacturing ) for pre-surgical planning was in 2012 during RSNA (Radiological Society of North America) in Chicago. As a small box containing pieces of a 3D-printed heart from a pediatric patient was passed around the conference room, I could tell that the room stopped breathing. For me, it was a sensational moment as a radiologist and as a healthcare provider. Having a patient’s disease in three-dimension in my hands was unimaginable. I immediately wanted to learn more about the technology and how I, as a radiologist, could use it to help my clinical colleagues. However, to me, the road to implementation was not simple and almost obscure.  The barrier to entry for such technology seems to require one to be a combination of a designer, a mechanical engineer, and a software developer, and lastly a healthcare provider. 

Not giving up, I started organizing meetings focusing on learning and discussing healthcare 3D printing solutions in San Francisco called 3DHEALS, hoping to create a community composed of various disciplines to start to have more practical conversations to accelerate the adaptation of the technology.

Michelle and I met at an after-work healthcare technology conference, and we instantly hit it off because of our complementary knowledge and interest in healthcare, operational management, 3D printing, and engineering. We are both fascinated with the complex process of integrating promising technologies into healthcare. On top of that, Michelle’s background in both operations management and material science and engineering, and mine in medicine and education add unique perspectives to this book. 

That said, we both are fully aware of our limitations in various aspects of the subject of 3D printed surgical planning and do not proclaim to be field experts. This post serves as part 7 of this Guide series to thank individuals and companies for their insights and relationship with us and publication reference. Since our Guides are regularly updated and our conversations with our ecosystem never stop, this page will be updated whenever our guides are updated when appropriate.

Now On Demand:

1. Introduction:  What is operational management?
2. Technical Background
3. Strategic Issues
4. Tactical Issues
5. Financial Issues       
6. Financial Worksheet         
7. Acknowledgments/References

Acknowledgements: 

We would like to give special thanks and acknowledgment to the following individuals: 

• Dr. Parit Patel (Assistant professor of plastic and reconstructive surgery at Loyola Medicine)
• Dr. Elliot Brown (Assistant professor of radiology and biomedical imaging at Yale University)
• Dr. Jose Morey (Medical scientist with IBM Watson project, adjunct professor of radiology and biomedical imaging at the University of Virginia)
• Mr. Glen Jett from Sutter Health for providing valuable financial insights.
• Dr. Justin Ryan (Arizona State University Post-Doctoral Researcher, Phoenix Children’s Hospital Research Scientist) for providing valuable feedbacks and research on 3D printing for pediatric congenital heart cases.

• Dr. Justin Ryan
• Mr. Shannon Walter (Stanford School of Medicine, Manager of 3D and Quantitative Imaging Laboratory)
• Mr. Chris Letrong (Stanford School of Medicine, 3D Technologist)
• Dr. Ben Taragin (Children Hospital at Montefiore, Director of Pediatric Radiology)
• Dr. Joaquim M. Farinhas (Neuroradiology, Montefiore Medical Center)
• Materialse Inc. 
• Whitecloud Inc. 
• Stanford School of Medicine

References:

1. Columbus L. 2015 roundup of 3D printing market forecasts and estimates. http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2015/03/31/2015-roundup-of-3d-printing-market-forecasts-and-estimates/. Published March 31, 2015.
2. Chen HJ, Gabriel M. Healthcare 3D printing in academia. 3D https://3dheals.com/healthcare-3d-printing-in-academia/. Published October 1, 2015.
3. Friedman T, Michalski M, Goodman TR, Elliot Brown. 3D printing from diagnostic images: a radiologist’s primer with an emphasis on musculoskeletal imaging—putting the 3D printing of pathology into the hands of every physician. Skeletal Radiology, 1–15. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2282-6. Published November 23, 2015.
4. Koleilat I, Jaeggli M, Ewing JA, et al. Interobserver variability in physician-modified endograft planning by comparison with a three-dimensional printed aortic model. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 1–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.09.044. Published June 17, 2015.
5. Vaquerizo B, Theriault-Lauzier P, Piazza N. Percutaneous Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: Patient-specific Three-dimensional Computer-based Heart Model and Prototyping. Revista Española De Cardiología (English Edition), 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2015.08.005.
6. Giannopoulos AA, Chepelev L, Sheikh A, et al. 3D printed ventricular septal defect patch: a primer for the 2015 Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) hands-on course in 3D printing. 3D Printing in Medicine, 1–20. http://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-015-0002-4.
7. Cai T, Rybicki FJ, Giannopoulos AA, et al. The residual STL volume as a metric to evaluate accuracy and reproducibility of anatomic models for 3D printing: application in the validation of 3D-printable models of maxillofacial bone from reduced radiation dose CT images. 3D Printing in Medicine, 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-015-0003-3.
8. Rybicki FJ. 3D Printing in Medicine: an introductory message from the Editor-in-Chief. 3D Printing in Medicine, 1–1. http://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-015-0001-5.
9. VanKoevering KK, Morrison RJ, Prabhu SP, et al. Antenatal Three-Dimensional Printing of Aberrant Facial Anatomy. Pediatrics, 136(5), e1382–e1385. http://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-1062.
10. Dickinson KJ, Matsumoto J, Cassivi SD, et al. Individualizing Management of Complex Esophageal Pathology Using Three-Dimensional Printed Models. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 100(2), 692–697. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.03.115.
11. Itagaki MW. Using 3D printed models for planning and guidance during endovascular intervention: a technical advance. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 21(4), 338–341. http://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2015.14469.
12. Tai BL, Wang AC, Joseph JR, et al. A physical simulator for endoscopic endonasal drilling techniques: technical note. Journal of Neurosurgery, 1–6. http://doi.org/10.3171/2015.3.JNS1552.
13. Weinstock P, Prabhu SP, Flynn K, et al. Optimizing cerebrovascular surgical and endovascular procedures in children via personalized 3D printing. Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, 1–6. http://doi.org/10.3171/2015.3.PEDS14677.
14. Grant GT, Liacouras P, Santiago GF, et al. Restoration of the donor face after facial allotransplantation: digital manufacturing techniques. Annals of Plastic Surgery. 2014:72(6), 720–724. http://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000000189.
15. Huotilainen E, Paloheimo M, Salmi M, et al. Imaging requirements for medical applications of additive manufacturing. Acta Radiologica. 2014:55(1), 78–85. http://doi.org/10.1177/0284185113494198.
16. Huotilainen E, Jaanimets R., Valášek J, et al. Inaccuracies in additive manufactured medical skull models caused by the DICOM to STL conversion process Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2014:42(5), e259–e265. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2013.10.001.
17. Lethaus B, Poort L, Böckmann R, et al. Additive manufacturing for microvascular reconstruction of the mandible in 20 patients. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2012:40(1), 43–46. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2011.01.007.
18. Li Y, Jiang Y, Ye B, et al. Treatment of Dentofacial Deformities Secondary to Osteochondroma of the Mandibular Condyle Using Virtual Surgical Planning and 3-Dimensional Printed Surgical Templates. Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery. 2015:1–20. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2015.06.169.
19. Mazzoni S, Bianchi A, Schiariti G, et al. Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing Cutting Guides and Customized Titanium Plates Are Useful in Upper Maxilla Waferless Repositioning. Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery. 2015:73(4), 701–707. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2014.10.028.
20. Ogden KM, Aslan C, Ordway N, et al. Factors Affecting Dimensional Accuracy of 3-D Printed Anatomical Structures Derived from CT Data. Journal of Digital Imaging. 2015. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-015-9803-7.
21. Pinto JM, Arrieta C, Andia ME, et al. Sensitivity analysis of geometric errors in additive manufacturing medical models. Medical Engineering and Physics. 2015:37(3), 328–334. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.009.
22. Ryan JR, Chen T, Nakaji P, et al. Ventriculostomy simulation using patient-specific ventricular anatomy, 3D printing and hydrogel casting. World Neurosurgery. 1–7. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.06.016.
23. Wang JQ, Zhao CP, Sun X, et al. Printed three-dimensional anatomic templates for virtual preoperative planning before reconstruction of old pelvic injuries: initial results. Chinese Medical Journal. 2015:128(4), 477–6. http://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.151088.
24. Watson RA. A low-cost surgical application of additive fabrication. Journal of Surgical Education. 2014:71(1), 14–17. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.10.012.
25. Werner H, Santos JRL, Fontes R, et al. Additive manufacturing models of fetuses built from three-dimensional ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scan data. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010:36(3), 355–361. http://doi.org/10.1002/uog.7619.
26. Wong KC, Kumta SM, Geel NV, et al. One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, biomechanically evaluated custom implant after complex pelvic tumor resection. Computer Aided Surgery: Official Journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery. 2015:20(1), 14–23. http://doi.org/10.3109/10929088.2015.1076039.
27. Mendez B, Chiodo MV, and Patel PA. Customized “in-office” three-dimensional printing for virtual surgical planning in craniofacial surgery. The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2015:26(5):1584-6. http://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001768.
28. Peasah SK, McKay NL, Harman JS, et al. Medicare non-payment of hospital-acquired infections: infection rates three years post implementation. Medicaid & Medicare Research Review. 2013:3(3). https://www.cms.gov/mmrr/Downloads/MMRR2013_003_03_a08.pdf.
29. Willis DR. How to decide whether to buy new medical equipment. American Academy of Family Physicians. 2004. http://www.aafp.org/fpm/2004/0300/p53.html.
30. Rybicki F. Medical 3D printing for the radiologist. Radiographics. 2015:35(7):1965-88. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26562233.
31. Small T, Krebs V, Molloy R, et al. Comparison of acetabular shell position using patient specific instruments vs. standard surgical instruments: a randomized clinical trial. The Journal of Arthroplasty. 2014:29(5): 1030–1037. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.10.006.
32. Frakes DH, Ryan JR, Almefty KK, et al. Cerebral aneurysm clipping surgery simulation using patient-specific 3d printing and silicone casting. World Neurosurgery. 2016:88,175-181. http://www.worldneurosurgery.org/article/S1878-8750(16)00112-1/abstract.
33. Sher D. New study confirms 3d printing market to grow to $17 billion by 2020. 3D Printing Industry. 2015. http://3dprintingindustry.com/2015/08/24/new-study-confirms-3d-printing-market-grow-17-billion-2020/.
34. Zaleski A. Here’s why 2016 could be 3D printing’s breakout year. Fortune. 2015. http://fortune.com/2015/12/30/2016-consumer-3d-printing/.
35. Sher D. Many 3d printing patents are expiring soon: heres a round up & overview of them. 3D Printing Industry. 2015. http://3dprintingindustry.com/2013/12/29/many-3d-printing-patents-expiring-soon-heres-round-overview/.
36. Earls A, and Baya V. The road ahead for 3-D printers. PwC. 2014. http://www.pwc.com/us/en/technology-forecast/2014/3d-printing/features/future-3d-printing.html.
37. After explosion, US Department of Labor’s OSHA cites 3-D printing firm for exposing workers to combustible metal powder, electrical hazards: Powderpart Inc. faces $64,400 in penalties. S. Department of Labor: Occupational Safety & Health Administration. 2014. https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=26019.
38. Azimi P, Zhao D, Pouzet C, et al. Emissions of ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds from commercially available desktop three-dimensional printers with multiple filaments. ACS Publication. 2016. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.5b04983.
39. 3d printing safety. Carnegie Mellon University. http://www.cmu.edu/ehs/fact-sheets/3D-Printing-Safety.pdf.
40. Columbus L. 2015 roundup of 3d printing market forecasts and estimates. Forbes. 2015. http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2015/03/31/2015-roundup-of-3d-printing-market-forecasts-and-estimates/.
41. We cant wait: Obama administration announces new public-private partnership to support consortium of businesses, universities, and community colleges from Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania co-invest with federal government in a manufacturing innovation institute. The White House. 2012. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/16/we-can-t-wait-obama-administration-announces-new-public-private-partners.
42. Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing – General Principles-Terminology (ASTM) ISO/ASTM 52900:2015(E)
43. Gross BC, Erkal JL, Lockwood SY, et al. Evaluation of 3d printing and its potential impact on Biotechnology and the chemical sciences. Analytical Chemistry. 2014:86, 3240-3253. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/ipdf/10.1021/ac403397r.
44. 3d printers and 3d printing: technologies, processes and techniques. Sculpteo. https://www.sculpteo.com/en/3d-printing/3d-printing-technologies/.
45. Davies CT, Baird LM, Jacobson MD, et al. 3d printing of medical devices: when a novel technology meets traditional legal principles. Reed Smith. 2015. https://www.reedsmith.com/3d-printing-of-medical-devices–when-a-novel-technology-meets-traditional-legal-principles-09-09-2015/.
46. Leinauer M. FDA regulations (or lack thereof) of 3d printed medical devices. Ice Miller Legal Counsel. 2015. http://www.icemiller.com/ice-on-fire-insights/publications/fda-regulations-%28or-lack-thereof%29-of-3d-printed-me/.
47. Espalin D, Perez M, Medina F, et al. Sterilization of FDA-manufactured parts. Stratasys. http://web.stratasys.com/rs/objet/images/SSYS-WP-Sterilization-FDM-01-14%20FINAL.pdf.
48. CPT process – how a code becomes a code. American Medical Association. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/solutions-managing-your-practice/coding-billing-insurance/cpt/cpt-process-faq/code-becomes-cpt.page.
49. Gholipour A, Estroff JA, Sahin M, et al. A posteriori estimation of isotropic high-resolution volumetric MRI from orthogonal thick-slice scans. Warfield Departments of Radiology and Neurology, Childrens Hospital Boston, and Harvard Medical School. 2010:13(0 2): 109–116.
50. Ejaz F, Ryan J, Henriksen M1, David Frakes, et al. Color-coded patient-specific physical models of congenital heart disease. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 2013. http://ipalab.fulton.asu.edu/wp-content/JournalPubs/RPJ_2013.pdf.
51. Matsumoto JS, Morris JM, Foley TA, et al. Three-dimensional physical modeling: applications and experience at Mayo Clinic. RadioGraphics. 2015:35(7), 1989-2006. http://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140260.
52. Clinical Trials. https://clinicaltrials.gov/.
53. Johnson S. Erlanger inks deal with 3D-printer startup to print models of patients’ organs. Times Free Press. 2015. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/oct/12/model-surgery-local-tech-startsays-3-d-mockup/330008/.
54. Grunewald SJ. Can 3d digital models be patented? Federal courts to make key decision this summer. com. 2015. http://3dprint.com/104501/federal-court-3d-model-patent/.
55. Laser melting (LM). Additively. https://www.additively.com/en/learn-about/laser-melting.
56. Layer thickness in 3D printing: an additive manufacturing basic. Sculpteo. https://www.sculpteo.com/en/glossary/layer-thickness-definition/.
57. Hospital value-based purchasing. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. 2015: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-initiatives-patient-assessment-instruments/hospital-value-based-purchasing/index.html.
58. M Cotteleer, et al. The 3D Opportunity Primer: the Basics of Additive Manufacturing. Deloitte University Press. March 6, 2014. http://dupress.com/articles/the-3d-opportunity-primer-the-basics-of-additive-manufacturing/?id=2el:3dp:dupmooc:eng:dup:mmddyy:novoed
59. Technical Considerations of Additive Manufacture Medical Device: Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. 2016. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM499809.pdf

Related Articles:

3DHEALS Guides (Collective) – This is where we dive deep into subjects that you will find helpful for your projects and career.

3DEALS Expert Corner (Collective) – This is where we invite field experts to write their perspectives in a first-person narrative. To write for this column, please email: info@3dheals.com

3DHEALS From Academia (Collective) – This section features recent, relevant, close to commercialization academic publications in the space of healthcare 3D printing, 3D bioprinting, and related emerging technologies.

The post 3D Printing in Hospitals (Guide): Acknowledgement, References appeared first on 3DHeals.

Gabe Linke has been in the imaging profession for over 10 years as a technologist in MRI. He received his Bachelors in Radiation Sciences from the University of Nebraska Medical Center. 2 years ago he became the Cardiac Imaging & 3D Printing Coordinator for Children’s Hospital and Medical Center in Omaha Nebraska. His original duties involved overseeing Cardiac CT and MRI and starting their 3D printing program. This program started with 3D printing cardiac models for presurgical planning. It has since grown outside of cardiology and is hospital-wide serving multiple subspecialties with presurgical planning, educational modeling, and numerous research applications. Gabe will also be a speaker for our upcoming 3DHEALS OMAHA: AdvancedTek, Healthcare 3D Printing event.

Jenny: When was the first encounter you had with 3D printing? What was that experience like? What were you thinking at that moment?

Gabe: I experienced 3D printing for the first time when I accepted my position at Omaha Children’s Hospital. I was in my second interview for a cardiac imaging coordinator position and Dr. Scott Fletcher handed me a printed heart from a case they had done.  It blew me away to hold the replica of the child’s heart in my hand and I immediately could see the potential this technology would have to impact healthcare.

Jenny: What inspired you to start your journey in 3D printing (bio-fabrication/bio-printing)?

Gabe: After accepting the job at Omaha Children’s I was shown the printer that we had received as a gift to start our own in-house 3D printing program. The program started in Cardiology, but as I saw the way these 3D Models impacted the way our Cardio-thoracic surgeons I knew we had to do more. Seeing the impact in the first few cases inspired me to go to my directors and expand the program to a hospital-wide 3D printing service.

Jenny: Who inspired you the most along this journey in 3D printing (bio-printing/bio-fabrication)? This can be a mentor, a patient, a celebrity, anyone basically. You can name more than one as well.

Gabe: I think I would have to say Dr. Scott Fletcher after my answer earlier right? Scott gave me the gift of this job and I will forever be grateful to him. He has taught me so much about congenital cardiology and has supported me every step of the way as this program continues to grow.

Dr. Jorge Zuniga has taught me so much about the technology of 3D printing and the global impact we can have using this technology together. I very early on adopted his vision for open collaboration is paramount in a successful program. I am honored to call him a personal friend and colleague.

Jenny: What motivates you the most for your work?

Gabe: Our patients, period. I joined the medical profession for one reason and that was to help people. Seeing a child set down an iPad to better understand why he’s having an operation, hearing a surgeon speak on how they did a better procedure or operation due to a 3D model, or hearing how much better a nurse can do her job because she was handed a 3D model of a patient’s heart. All of these are helping a patient through one means or another to have better care.

Jenny: What is/are the biggest obstacle(s) in your line of work? If you have conquered them, what were your solutions?

Gabe: One of the biggest obstacles, was growing our program outside of Cardiology. My solution was easy:  Dr. Lincoln Wong. Dr. Wong, one of our radiologists, adopted this technology and showed it to everyone. He would be reading a case and see where the application could help a surgeon and would have a model made. He would take these models to the surgeons and that was it. Our hospital now prints for multiple subspecialties and we continue to grow. Dr. Wong’s passion for 3D printing has been paramount in the expansion of our program.

Jenny: What do you think is (are) the biggest challenge(s) in 3D Printing/bio-printing? What do you think the potential solution(s) is (are)?

Gabe: I have to admit that I have to answer this from a perspective that I do not personally know. Omaha Children’s has been very supportive of its 3D Printing Program, but in general, I think that funding for these programs is the biggest challenge. This will take care of itself in time, as I believe that reimbursement is inevitable based on the positive impacts 3D models are having on patient care.

Jenny: If you are granted three wishes by a higher being, what would they be?

Gabe:

1. A life full of love: it is the single most powerful thing in the universe and can overcome anything put in its way.
2. The cure for mental illness/addiction.
3. The Flashes Speed ( had to lighten the mood a little)

Jenny: What advice would you give to a smart driven college student in the “real world”? What bad advice you heard should they ignore?

Gabe: Find something that you’re passionate about and you enjoy doing and figure out how to turn it into your job.

Bad advice: Do a job just for the money.

The post Interview: Gabe Linke, 3D Printing Coordinator, Omaha Children’s Hospital 🗓 appeared first on 3DHeals.

“I’m lucky to have been a part of organizing medical 3D printing experts in the Omaha area into a group, NE3D Health, which meets and collaborates regularly. Our mission aligns perfectly with that of 3DHEALS so it is a natural fit.”

Community: Omaha, NE

3DHEALS members can get in touch with Tyler Scherr here

Jenny: Tell us, what is one quote that represents you?
Tyler: “The great lesson from the true mystics, from Zen monks, and now also from the Humanistic and Transpersonal psychologists – that the sacred is in the ordinary, that it is to be found in one’s daily life, in one’s neighbors, friends, and family, in one’s backyard…to be looking elsewhere for miracles is to be a sure sign of ignorance that everything is miraculous.” ~ Abraham Maslow; Religion, Values and Peak Experiences
Jenny: Tell us a little about yourself. (Where are you from originally? Where are you located? What are you working on?)
Tyler: I’m originally from Aberdeen, South Dakota and have lived in the Great Plains my whole life. I currently work for UNeMed, the technology transfer office for the University of Nebraska Medical Center and the University of Nebraska in Omaha. I have the privilege of working with clinicians and researchers to protect and commercialize their incredible inventions.
Jenny: What made you decide to become a 3DHEALS community manager?
Tyler: I’m lucky to have been a part of organizing medical 3D printing experts in the Omaha area into a group, NE3D Health, which meets and collaborates regularly. Our mission aligns perfectly with that of 3DHEALS so it is a natural fit.
Jenny: If you have already organized a 3DHEALS event, what were your experiences like?  Anything unexpected happened?
Tyler: We have an upcoming 3DHEALS event in the works, so stay tuned!
Jenny: What do you think of innovations in healthcare 3D printing or bioprinting? What do you hope to see in the next five years? 10 years?
Tyler: It’s been interesting to see the slow adoption of 3D printing across clinical specialties. Dentistry and orthopedics were some early adopters, but I work with ophthalmologists, pathologists, anesthesiologists, nephrologists, radiologists, rheumatologists, etc. who all are now seeing the value in 3D printing for medical device design and personalized medicine.
Jenny: If you have done 3D printing before, what have you made/designed? (Photos if available, preferably in healthcare application)

Double Angled Needle Holder

Tyler: I’m not the most skilled designer, but I’ve contributed on some rudimentary medical device design for a double angled needle holder and a precision injection syringe plunger (see attached photos – both published in an issue of Medical Design Technology Magazine)
Jenny: Most of our community managers are entrepreneurial and adventurous, what risks/adventures have you taken that you’d like to share with us? Any hopes or regrets?
Tyler: During my Ph.D. I co-founded a 3D Printing group at UNMC, the UNMC Makers, and helped open a maker space in the McGoogan Library of Medicine. I then worked on an educational software startup with a few of the friends I made from the maker space. We had a lot of fun and fared well in a few local pitch and business plan competitions, but ultimately had to give it up after a year. I’d still like to open some sort of alt-school maker space educational experience in the Omaha area!

Precision Injection Syringe Plunger

Jenny: Who would you like to find and to include in the 3DHEALS community you are building?
Tyler: Academia can be incredibly siloed, so I’m hoping to get connected with faculty inventors who still don’t know about our group. I’m also hoping to create more contacts with the local, thriving maker community!

Jenny: What would you like to accomplish with this new 3DHEALS community in the future?
Tyler: I’m hoping to really connect all of the regional 3D printing experts, both within the university and within the community, to build a medical device pipeline. I know we have the talent and creativity from both the clinician and maker sides.
Jenny: What do you think about the innovation environment (for health tech or for general technology) in your city? What can be done to improve it?
Tyler: Omaha is home to a thriving tech innovation environment, with major universities, hospitals, software companies, and startup incubators supported by the Omaha Chamber of Commerce!
Jenny: What are you most proud of about your city?
Tyler: I’m most proud of the general goodwill present in Omaha residents – really from my experience, this is true of Nebraskan’s and most of the Great Plains residents as well.
Jenny: What are you most proud of about the innovation community in your city?
Tyler: I’m most proud of all of the resources that the community has leveraged to help small businesses. For example, the new Center for Advanced and Emerging Technology at Metropolitan Community College in Omaha provides community access to a state-of-the-art maker space and hoteling space for startups. Metro Community College has also partnered with the city and generous donors to create a digital library – Do Space.
Jenny: What do you think are the top priorities in healthcare innovations for your city/community?
Tyler: Well, with the soon-to-be-opened Interdisciplinary EXperiential Center for Enduring Learning (iEXCEL) on UNMC’s campus, the community is going all-in on the future of AR/VR technology in healthcare education and application.
Jenny: What do you hope to accomplish through your role as the 3DHEALS community manager?
Tyler: I hope to create new connections, locally, nationally, and internationally, to facilitate medical 3D printing innovation!
Jenny: What do you do for fun?
Tyler: I enjoy hiking, playing disc golf, listening to podcasts, and spending time with my family.
Jenny: Anything else?
Tyler: Noted computed scientist Alan Kay famously said, “The best way to predict the future is to create it.” I believe 3DHEALS is playing a small part in creating a better future!

The post Interview: Tyler Scherr, Omaha, Nebraska appeared first on 3DHeals.

3DHEALS LLC
Jenny Chen, info@3dheals.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[San Franciso, California, USA] – 3DHEALS, LLC. is pleased to these announce fundraising event for Limbforge and Victoria Hand Project on the night of April 20^th, 2018. These are two nonprofit organizations leveraging 3D printing scanning and 3D printing technologies for amputees worldwide. They are doing this through the development of low cost, accessible, clinically tested upper extremity prosthetic solutions.
3DHEALS2018 is an annual global summit focusing on healthcare 3D printing and bio-printing solutions for medical and dental industries. The summit attracts hundreds of healthcare providers, entrepreneurs, and organizations to the Bay Area to learn and collaborate on projects. The fundraising event occurs annually in conjunction with the summit to provide financial support to the nonprofit organizations in the field. This year the fundraising event aims to raise money for the Victoria Hand Project (VHP)(Victoria, Canada) and Limbforge (Seattle, USA). Both organizations aim to address the shortage of prosthetics professionals and high-cost of prosthetics, especially in the developing world. Both organizations aim to develop high-function, customized, culturally appropriate, visually-appealing, low cost, 3D printed prosthesis system and a “scalable manufacturing system” whereby the prosthesis can be built anywhere in the world. Not only do both organizations aim to improve thousands of amputees lives’ with technologies, they also effectively engage local healthcare providers to provide sustainable long-term solutions. Additionally, both organizations have collaborated on multiple projects with many international groups including the MSF foundation and Nia technologies, another 3D printing prosthetics nonprofit organization from Canada.
The night of the fundraising event will start with four presentations from the Dr. Nick Dechev from Victoria Hand Project, Andreas Bastian from Limbforge, Jerry Evans from Nia Technologies, as well as Dr. Safa Herfat from MSF foundation. Each is anticipated to present the public with powerful stories on how emerging technologies like 3D printing can impact the developing world in a way that is never been observed before. These stories will not only be about the benefits of the technologies, but also the challenges of being the early adopters of technologies in complex geopolitical and cultural settings. The presentations will be expected to be educational, meaningful, and profound. A silent auction will take place after the presentations. The link to more information about the event is here.
 

The post Press Release: 3DHEALS2018 Fundraising Event for Limbforge and Victoria Hand Project: Global Healthcare Impact of 3D Printing Is A Reality, But Needs Your Help appeared first on 3DHeals.

Sang Joon Park is Founder and CEO of MEDICALIP and Professor of the Department of Radiology at the Seoul National University Hospital in South Korea. Dr. Park graduated in computer science at the school of the engineering college. He then went to the college of medicine of Seoul National University to obtain his Master and Ph.D. degree in Interdisciplinary Program in Radiation Applied Life Science. He is an expert in 3D medical imaging for developing CT/MRI-based imaging biomarker and medical 3D printing software platform MEDIP. He is currently a Vice Director at the Medical Device Innovation Center of Seoul National University Hospital and help researchers and medical device company for performing easy clinical trials. He has acted as an international reviewer and editor in medical imaging society as well as a member of the committee for medical device development in Korean government, with a goal of improving clinical outcomes using 3D medical technology. Most recently, he is in charge of a leader of the company, MEDICALIP that providing medical 3D printing procedure software “MEDIP” for 3D organ printing. This was after many years of collaboration with clinicians and scientists at Seoul National University. He brings his multi-disciplinary experience in specialized 3D printing in medicine to share the clinical trials and workflow trends. Dr. Park will be a speaker at the #3DHEALS2018 conference on April 20-21st, 2018.
Jenny: When was the first encounter you had with 3D printing? What was that experience like? What were you thinking at that moment?
Joon: I remember the first time when I encountered 3D printing was in university public workplace 10 years ago. It was such a huge and expensive device that there was a burden to use it personally. I instantly started to think about bringing digital anatomies from PC to reality.
Jenny: What inspired you to start your journey in 3D printing?
Joon: I had worked as a researcher in the department of radiology for several years, and one day I thought that there would be an easy way to identify the anatomy of the human body in my hand rather than on the computer. First of all, I wanted to bridge the parts that would be the beginning of a wonderful story of organ transplantation in the distant future.
Jenny: Who inspired you the most along this journey in 3D printing? This can be a mentor, a patient, a celebrity, anyone basically. You can name more than one as well.
Joon: One day while I was having dinner with surgeons in my hospital, I was inspired to hear that I could help patients and doctors if we use some 3D models better before the surgery. That was 3D printing!
Jenny: What motivates you the most for your work?
Joon: Currently, it is a company called Medical IP (also MEDICALIP). I believe there are great values in 3D printing that were trapped at the lab level which the society really needed. More than 10 researchers are working hard now at MEDICALIP for this reason.
 
Jenny: What is/are the biggest obstacle(s) in your line of work? If you have conquered them, what were your solutions?
Joon: Cost issues are a big hurdle. Time cost for 3D printing work, the opportunity cost for many researchers to move together, and financial cost for material and machine and so on. I think there should be a platform to reduce these costs.
Jenny: What do you think is (are) the biggest challenge(s) in 3D Printing/bio-printing? What do you think the potential solution(s) is (are)?
Joon: Reducing the cost of collaborating with multiple people. Making communication platform.
Jenny: If you are granted three wishes by a higher being, what would they be?
Joon: Genie’s three wishes are funny but hard to choose. Exactly the reason why I started 3D printing, I hope to help people who are sick and in a tough condition with advanced medical technologies. I would also like to have a psychic ability to treat someone.
Jenny: What advice would you give to a smart driven college student in the “real world”? What bad advice you heard should they ignore?
Joon: Build up diverse experiences through new challenges in other fields based on medical 3D tech. Bad advice is “Do not do something for challenges.”
Jenny: If you could have a giant billboard to promote a message to millions and even billions of people in our community (i.e. healthcare 3D printing and bio-fabrication), what message would that be?
Joon: ANYONE CAN USE: 3D printed anatomical model
Jenny: What were/was the best investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?
Joon: Buying my first $4,000 FDM printing machine.
Jenny: What was/is the biggest risk you took in your career?
Joon: Currently, I am putting all of my energy, juggling two things at a time, my scholarship and business.
Jenny: What do you enjoy in your spare time? What are you passionate about outside of your work/3d printing?
Joon: Stargazing
Jenny: What is your favorite quote? Why?
Joon: “True art is characterized by an irresistible urge in the creative artist.” by Einstein
Jenny: What does the word “3DHEALS” mean to you? =)
Joon: 3DHEALS heals you with 3D.
 
 

The post Interview: Dr. Sang Joon Park, CEO of MEDICALIP, Seoul National University Hospital appeared first on 3DHeals.

Dr. Michael Scherer is an Assistant Clinical Professor at Loma Linda University, a Clinical Instructor at University of Nevada –Las Vegas, and maintains a practice limited to prosthodontics and implant dentistry in Sonora, California. He is a fellow of the American College of Prosthodontists, has published articles, DVD training series, and in‐person and online courses related to implant dentistry, clinical prosthodontics, and digital technology with a special emphasis on implant over dentures. As an avid technology & computer hobbyist, Dr. Scherer’s involvement in digital implant dentistry has led him to develop and utilize new technology with CAD/CAM surgical systems, implement interactive CBCT implant planning, and outside of the box radiographic imaging concepts. Dr. Scherer also maintains two online courses: 1‐ Fast‐Track Digital Dentistry & 3D Printing, 2‐ Fast‐Track Full‐Arch Reconstruction Implant Overdentures, and five YouTube channels: “LearnLOCATOR”, “LearnLODI”, “LearnSATURNO”, “LearnLOCATOR F‐Tx” and “The 3D Dentist”‐ popular YouTube channels on dental implant procedures and digital dentistry.
Dr. Scherer will be a speaker at 3DHEALS2018.
Jenny: When was the first encounter you had with 3D printing? What was that experience like? What were you thinking at that moment?
Michael: Thank you for the opportunity to have this interview! I began working with 3D printing early in practice in the form of surgical templates to assist in dental implant positioning. The original guides were printed in Europe, had to travel via customs, and were incredibly expensive. Looking back, it was a paradigm shift. Wow, things have changed!
Jenny: What inspired you to start your journey/company/career/research in 3D printing (bio-fabrication/bio-printing)?
Michael: To democratize the system and make printing available via reasonably priced systems, open-source software, and printers that were available to clinicians around the world. I knew from day 1 that it was going to be big for clinical dental practice, but there were so many barriers to implementation. Slowly but surely we have begun to break down each one of those and are starting to see the proliferation of desktop-grade printers in our industry.
Jenny: Who inspired you the most along this journey in 3D printing (bio-printing/bio-fabrication)? This can be a mentor, a patient, a celebrity, anyone basically. You can name more than one as well.
Michael: When I got started with these workflows, very few or even any other dentists were actually using 3d printers in their practices. There were early leaders in 3D printing techniques within dentistry, such as Dr. Ganz who is a leader in 3D imaging and some of the incredible people at Loma Linda University Implant Dentistry department and their pioneering work in “rapid prototyping” of mandibles for dental implant reconstruction in 1983-1985.
Jenny: What motivates you the most for your work?
Michael: I am motivated by being able to see the smiles on my patients’ faces when I show them what we can do with dental 3D printing and modern technology. I have one patient, Jan, who is an older lady that loves rubber ducks. I asked her to bring in her favorite rubber duck and I offered to print an exact copy of it. Using my dental x-ray machine, I was able to scan the duck, create a model out of it, and then 3D print one for her. I was blown away by how touched she was… and will never forget her smile.
Jenny: What is/are the biggest obstacle(s) in your line of work? If you have conquered them, what were your solutions?
Michael: People who say it can’t be done. There are many naysayers and those who have motivations other than improving the quality of care and bringing enhanced access to modern technology. I enjoy the challenge of proving them it can be done.
Jenny: What do you think is (are) the biggest challenge(s) in 3D Printing/bio-printing? What do you think the potential solution(s) is (are)?
Michael: A lack of real and useful biocompatible materials. Regulatory agencies need to make the approval process easier and less expensive than it currently is. We have the computing technology to do almost anything but we don’t have materials that can be used intraorally or those we have are very limited in scope.
Jenny: What advice would you give to a smart driven college student in the “real world”? What bad advice you heard should they ignore?
Michael: Respect your professors yet challenge them every day. Have perspective and ask questions yet understand where we have come from. Do not settle for “this is the way we have always done things” and most certainly never stop pushing.
Jenny: If you could have a giant billboard to promote a message to millions and even billions of people in our community (i.e. healthcare 3D printing and bio-fabrication), what message would that be?
Michael: The most important rule: “You have to have fun while doing this or else it won’t go the distance.” I began this journey when I was young… playing video games. An insane amount of Atari/Nintendo/early Computers. It must be fun to do and not boring, there always should be a challenge, a jump you can’t seem to make in level 9, to keep us going. Like Jobs’ said, “Stay hungry, stay foolish.” I live this mantra daily.
Jenny: What were/was the best investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?
Michael: Absolutely my first Formlabs printer. It wasn’t my first printer, in fact, I owned 5 of them prior to my first Formlabs, but it was my first printer that just got the job done, rather than spending hours “troubleshooting.”It’s been a really fun journey since then and figuring out what works for dentistry.
Jenny: What does the word “3DHEALS” mean to you? =)
Michael: It’s our commitment to improving worldwide healthcare through the use of additive manufacturing, digital technology, and innovation but also at a reasonable cost. It’s about stoking the fire within each and every one of us to better push ourselves to drive healthcare into the 21st century.

The post Interview: Dr. Michael D Scherer On Digital Dentistry – "The original guides were printed in Europe, had to travel via customs, and were incredibly expensive. Looking back, it was a paradigm shift. Wow, things have changed!" appeared first on 3DHeals.

Want to write a piece for 3DHEALS Expert Corner? Email us: info@3dheals.com

On the evening of January 22nd, 2018, 3DHEALS hosted the first pilot executive working conference at the Washington DC office of ReedSmith, a law firm with special interests in liability issues related to 3D printed medical device. The goal of this conference aims to bring executives from different healthcare organizations, additive manufacturing industry, bioprinting and pharma companies, academia, and the government policy experts together to tackle some of the tougher problems facing the healthcare 3D printing and bioprinting industry. In theory, the small group format will allow decision makers in each organization to have a multi-disciplinary conversation, outside of the silo they often found themselves in.
There was no sales pitch in this conference. The goal was one and only: Finding out what are the top challenges facing the industry, and have a conversation to initiate solutions. We named this 3-hour event, “3DHEALS: Taming the Wild West of 3D Printing”, and focused on policy related issues for the attendees. While due to inopportune government shut-down no government entity was present (i.e. FDA, DOD, NIH, etc), the conversations were filled with enthusiasms and inspiration. Below is our meeting minute and we think sharing the notes will be beneficial to everyone in the ecosystem. 
Attendees: Mike Tilkin (American College of Radiology), Ankit Saharan (EOS), Robert Weseley (St. Louis Children’s Hospital), Jay Morris (Mayo Clinic), Lee Dockstader (HP), Celeste Letourneau (Reed Smith), John Jameson (Winningconnections), Ben Holmes (Nanochon), Kara Noack (BASF), Rik Jakobs (3DSystems, NextDent), John Hartner (VC/Digital Industrialist LLC), Matt Jacobson (Reed Smith), Jenny Chen (3DHeals), Daniel Ortiz (3DHeals)

Clinical Trials Group: 9:00 – 9:15 pm

(Participants: Jenny Chen, Celeste Letourneau, Rik Jacobs, Ben Holmes)

Topic 1: Challenges for clinical trials on evidence or efficacy of 3D printing in healthcare.

Group Summary:
Costs:

• • There are several ways to get additional funding for clinical trials. Government funding and funding from non-profit organizations are available. If the clinical trial involves routine care, then the trial is often qualified to participate in cost-sharing coverage (by insurance companies).

• • Starting legal advice early (at phase 1 of trial) can de-risk cost of a trial down the line.

• Designing a business model to decrease the risk of trial is important.

Design: Design trial also serves to contain cost. To increase the chance of cost containment, strategies include pairing with larger entities (such as NIH), being beyond phase 1 trial, optimizing the timing of the clinical trial. For example, the trial for a rare disease will take longer (i.e. more costly). A well-known, outspoken research sponsor with a rich network will potentially decrease the timing of the trial.
Communication is the key. Picking a good spokesperson (who doesn’t have to be a PR firm) is important. This person should be a good listener and also able to communicate in multiple different industrial languages that are easy to digest. This is especially important when the audience is the government/legislator.
Benefits of conducting clinical trials: Clinical trial can serve side-goal of establishing a pathway to the reimbursement and educate the communities you will get paid from.
Roundtable Discussion:
– A lot of the scientific work takes 5-10 years before attempts at reimbursement discussion.
– Sometimes trials are attempting to provide solutions to problems that don’t exist or doesn’t actually answer the problem.
– A local insurance company in Minnesota will pay for some 3D prints even though CMS will not (becaused of assumed value added).
– Nontraditional funding exists and can be a good source of funding. 

Manufacturing Potential of Hospitals: 9:15 pm – 9:32 pm

(Participants: John Hartner, Matt Jacobson, Jay Morris, Lee Dockstader)

Topic 2: What is the potential for the hospital to become a 3D printing manufacturer?

Group summary:
It is important to define what is a medical device. In common sense, they can include surgical models, surgical guides, implants, and surgical tools. Depending on who you ask, the definition of “medical device” is different in FDA’s lingo versus that of the law (liability law). Even if a diagnostic model causes harm, it’s still held liable.
Roundtable Discussion:
What should be within the scope of the hospital? What should be okay for hospitals to produce?
Several suggestions:
– Non-diagnostic surgical models are okay for hospitals to produce.
– Common opinion: Class II/III medical devices should not be at manufactured the hospital level.
– Are surgical instruments okay? Depending on the resources of the institution, the manufacturer should be accredited.
– Living tissue like live cartilage in wide geographic distribution is not yet a reality. Some larger institutions will have a GMP. In hospital tissue engineering still seems a future possibility.
Eventually, a system or device production in the hospital would have to be accredited by a regulatory body like the ACR. Although the cost of the device goes down with in-house production, the liability and related insurance will go up.

3D printing process vs end device regulation: 9:32 – 9:43 pm

(Participants: Mike Tilkin, John Jameson, Robert Wesley, Kara Noack, Ankit Saharan)

Topic 3: Should regulation be at the 3D printing process or end device level?

Group Summary:
Although 3D printing process regulation/qualification is eventually needed, we are not there yet. It is still more practical to just regulate end device. The process to be regulated will include regulation on materials, sterilization process, manufacturing environment, documentation, and personnel certification.
FDA reviewer knowledge and efficiency vary from one to another. They can be a novice to that specific device/industry. The industry needs to spend more time and efforts to educate the public, including the FDA.
FDA document  (recent technical guidance) is a step forward but still at the leadership level. It will take awhile for it to trickle down to the reviewer level.
Roundtable discussion:
FDA typical approval/clearance pathways: PMA, de novo process, etc. Default goes to PMA, which is the most stringent pathway. Companies should consider going to de novo process. “Me too” process has funding implications and is widely variable.
General discussion
In the Netherlands, after being encouraged by 3D printing entrepreneur, the local dental school now has 3D printing in the dental school curriculum.
It is very important to ensure education and have diverse collaboratives.
ReedSmith White Paper on 3D Printed Medical Device and Liability Law:
o   3D Printing of Manufactured Goods: An Updated Analysis
o   3D Printing of Medical Devices: When a Novel Technology Meets Traditional Legal Principles

Articles you may also like:

Interview: Luiz Fernando Michaelis, Co-founder & CEO of Hefesto Med Tech

Taipei Taiwan Event Recap: 2018 – What’s next after the hype?

The post Government Shutdown and 3DHEALS: There is a Connection, Believe or Not appeared first on 3DHeals.

Justin Ryan, PhD is a Science Foundation Arizona fellow and a research scientist at Phoenix Children’s Hospital. Justin earned his BA in Digital Art in 2010 at ASU, an MS and PhD in Biomedical Engineering (ASU) in 2016. Justin’s background in 3D computer imaging and animation has informed his current research initiatives in the physical and virtual modeling of biological systems. He currently runs the operations of the Cardiac 3D Print Lab at Phoenix Children’s Hospital, where he produces 3D printed models for surgical planning and medical education. In the last four years, he has printed over three hundred hearts and has expanded the lab while utilizing three 3D printers. Dr. Ryan will be a speaker at #3DHEALS2018. 

Jenny: When was the first encounter you had with 3D printing? What was that experience like? What were you thinking at that moment?
Justin: I first encountered 3D printing in art school, in a class specializing exploring ways to visualize data through novel means – with an emphasis on 3D printing. Students were discovering amazing pathways to visualize traffic patterns, ballet performances, animal migrations, deaths of languages, and so many more things. I found myself exploring 3D printing as a means to engage with anatomy. Engineering professor, David Frakes, Ph.D., gave me a pathway for meaningful use of this art – which we can now say has translated well into the medical science domain.
Jenny: Who inspired you the most along this journey in 3D printing (bio-printing/bio-fabrication)? This can be a mentor, a patient, a celebrity, anyone basically. You can name more than one as well.
Justin: It is hard to say what has inspired me, but I can certainly say what (or specifically “who”) has enabled me to start this journey in medical research. Dr. David Frakes, a biomedical engineering professor, and Dr. Dan Collins, art professor, and Dr. Stephen Pophal, cardiologist, enabled me to succeed. As a soon-to-be graduate of art, I had an opportunity to repurpose my art-making skills to do something, not just novel, but also potentially life-saving. Two graduate degrees and 8 years later, we have a small, but efficient hospital-based 3D print lab (starting in 2012) which has produced over 500 3D printed heart models.
Jenny: What is/are the biggest obstacle(s) in your line of work? If you have conquered them, what were your solutions?
Justin:
-Insurance reimbursement.
-Getting a multi-center clinical trial through different hospitals IRB with very little funds.
Jenny: What do you think is (are) the biggest challenge(s) in 3D Printing/bio-printing? What do you think the potential solution(s) is (are)?
Justin: Insurance reimbursement… again.

3D Printed Congenital Heart Disease model photo by Phoenix Children Hospital

Jenny: What advice would you give to a smart driven college student in the “real world”? What bad advice you heard should they ignore?
Justin: Find the overlap between your work and passion. It makes the long nights, failures, and frustrations all worth it.
Jenny: What were/was the best investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?
Justin: My student loan debt.
Jenny: What were/was the worst investment you made in 3D printing/bio-printing/bio-fabrication?
Justin: Failures can be an investment – always a learning experience.
Jenny: What was/is the biggest risk you took in your career?
Justin: Taking a leap of faith 8 years ago and start on a path of developing medical 3D printing into a career was my biggest risk. Along the way, I have met some incredible medical doctors as well as families who have pushed me to create and build.
Jenny: What do you enjoy in your spare time? What are you passionate about outside of your work/3d printing?
Justin: While I may be in a landlocked state, I do love surfing when I get to a beach.
Jenny: What does the word “3DHEALS” mean to you? =)
Justin: A community of like-mind trying to build awareness, adoption, and advancement of a life-saving technology.
 
 
 

The post Interview: Justin Ryan, 500+ Heart Models later… appeared first on 3DHeals.