Cargando…

3D printed PLA Army-Navy retractors when used as linear retractors yield clinically acceptable tolerances

BACKGROUND: Modern low-cost 3D printing technologies offer the promise of access to surgical tools in resource scarce areas, however optimal designs for manufacturing have not yet been established. We explore how the optimization of 3D printing parameters when manufacturing polylactic acid filament...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Joshua V., Dang, Alexis B. C., Lee, Carlin S., Dang, Alan B. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6873412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31754879
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41205-019-0053-z
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Modern low-cost 3D printing technologies offer the promise of access to surgical tools in resource scarce areas, however optimal designs for manufacturing have not yet been established. We explore how the optimization of 3D printing parameters when manufacturing polylactic acid filament based Army-Navy retractors vastly increases the strength of retractors, and investigate sources of variability in retractor strength, material cost, printing time, and parameter limitations. METHODS: Standard retractors were printed from various polylactic acid filament spools intra-manufacturer and inter-manufacturer to measure variability in retractor strength. Printing parameters were systematically varied to determine optimum printing parameters. These parameters include retractor width, thickness, infill percentage, infill geometry, perimeter number, and a reinforced joint design. Estimated retractor mass from computer models allows us to estimate material cost. RESULTS: We found statistically significant differences in retractor strength between spools of the same manufacturer and between manufacturers. We determined the true strength optimized retractor to have 30% infill, 3 perimeters, 0.25 in. thickness, 0.75 in. width, and has “Triangle” infill geometry and reinforced joints, failing at more than 15X the threshold for clinically excessive retraction and costs $1.25 USD. CONCLUSIONS: The optimization of 3D printed Army-Navy retractors greatly improve the efficacy of this instrument and expedite the adoption of 3D printing technology in many diverse fields in medicine not necessarily limited to resource poor settings.