Cargando…
Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful?
The interindividual variability is an increasingly global problem when treating patients from different backgrounds with diverse customs, metabolism, and necessities. Dose adjustment is frequently based on empirical methods, and therefore, the chance of undesirable side effects to occur is high. Thr...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5746746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28952558 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering4040079 |
_version_ | 1783289158227197952 |
---|---|
author | Konta, Andrea Alice García-Piña, Marta Serrano, Dolores R. |
author_facet | Konta, Andrea Alice García-Piña, Marta Serrano, Dolores R. |
author_sort | Konta, Andrea Alice |
collection | PubMed |
description | The interindividual variability is an increasingly global problem when treating patients from different backgrounds with diverse customs, metabolism, and necessities. Dose adjustment is frequently based on empirical methods, and therefore, the chance of undesirable side effects to occur is high. Three-dimensional (3D) Printed medicines are revolutionsing the pharmaceutical market as potential tools to achieve personalised treatments adapted to the specific requirements of each patient, taking into account their age, weight, comorbidities, pharmacogenetic, and pharmacokinetic characteristics. Additive manufacturing or 3D printing consists of a wide range of techniques classified in many categories but only three of them are mostly used in the 3D printing of medicines: printing-based inkjet systems, nozzle-based deposition systems, and laser-based writing systems. There are several drawbacks when using each technique and also the type of polymers readily available do not always possess the optimal properties for every drug. The aim of this review is to give an overview about the current techniques employed in 3D printing medicines, highlighting their advantages, disadvantages, along with the polymer and drug requirements for a successful printing. The major application of these techniques will be also discussed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5746746 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57467462018-01-03 Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? Konta, Andrea Alice García-Piña, Marta Serrano, Dolores R. Bioengineering (Basel) Review The interindividual variability is an increasingly global problem when treating patients from different backgrounds with diverse customs, metabolism, and necessities. Dose adjustment is frequently based on empirical methods, and therefore, the chance of undesirable side effects to occur is high. Three-dimensional (3D) Printed medicines are revolutionsing the pharmaceutical market as potential tools to achieve personalised treatments adapted to the specific requirements of each patient, taking into account their age, weight, comorbidities, pharmacogenetic, and pharmacokinetic characteristics. Additive manufacturing or 3D printing consists of a wide range of techniques classified in many categories but only three of them are mostly used in the 3D printing of medicines: printing-based inkjet systems, nozzle-based deposition systems, and laser-based writing systems. There are several drawbacks when using each technique and also the type of polymers readily available do not always possess the optimal properties for every drug. The aim of this review is to give an overview about the current techniques employed in 3D printing medicines, highlighting their advantages, disadvantages, along with the polymer and drug requirements for a successful printing. The major application of these techniques will be also discussed. MDPI 2017-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5746746/ /pubmed/28952558 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering4040079 Text en © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Konta, Andrea Alice García-Piña, Marta Serrano, Dolores R. Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title | Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title_full | Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title_fullStr | Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title_full_unstemmed | Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title_short | Personalised 3D Printed Medicines: Which Techniques and Polymers Are More Successful? |
title_sort | personalised 3d printed medicines: which techniques and polymers are more successful? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5746746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28952558 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering4040079 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kontaandreaalice personalised3dprintedmedicineswhichtechniquesandpolymersaremoresuccessful AT garciapinamarta personalised3dprintedmedicineswhichtechniquesandpolymersaremoresuccessful AT serranodoloresr personalised3dprintedmedicineswhichtechniquesandpolymersaremoresuccessful |