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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Konta, Andrea Alice, García-Piña, Marta, Serrano, Dolores R.
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