Additively manufactured versus conventionally pressed cranioplasty implants: An accuracy comparison
Evans, Peter Llewellyn
MetadataShow full item record
This article compared the accuracy of producing patient-specific cranioplasty implants using four different approaches. Benchmark geometry was designed to represent a cranium and a defect added simulating a craniectomy. An ‘ideal’ contour reconstruction was calculated and compared against reconstructions resulting from the four approaches –‘conventional’, ‘semi-digital’, ‘digital – non-automated’ and ‘digital – semi-automated’. The ‘conventional’ approach relied on hand carving a reconstruction, turning this into a press tool, and pressing titanium sheet. This approach is common in the UK National Health Service. The ‘semi-digital’ approach removed the hand-carving element. Both of the ‘digital’ approaches utilised additive manufacturing to produce the end-use implant. The geometries were designed using a non-specialised computer-aided design software and a semi-automated cranioplasty implant-specific computer-aided design software. It was found that all plates were clinically acceptable and that the digitally designed and additive manufacturing plates were as accurate as the conventional implants. There were no significant differences between the additive manufacturing plates designed using non-specialised computer-aided design software and those designed using the semi-automated tool. The semi-automated software and additive manufacturing production process were capable of producing cranioplasty implants of similar accuracy to multi-purpose software and additive manufacturing, and both were more accurate than handmade implants. The difference was not of clinical significance, demonstrating that the accuracy of additive manufacturing cranioplasty implants meets current best practice.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine
Peel, S., Eggbeer, D., Burton, H., Hanson, H. and Evans, P.L. (2018) 'Additively manufactured versus conventionally pressed cranioplasty implants: An accuracy comparison', Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine, 2018, 0954411918794718.
Article published in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411918794718
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (Grant ID: EP/L505249/1)
Cardiff Metropolitan University (Grant ID: Cardiff Metropolian (Internal))
Showing items related by title, author, subject and abstract.
Peel, Sean; Eggbeer, Dominic (2016)Purpose: The technical efficacy of, and clinical benefits from using Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Additive Manufacturing (AM) in the production of patient-specific devices (implants and guides) has been established. ...
Burton, Hanna; Eisenstein, Neil M.; Lawless, Bernard M.; Jamshidi, Parastoo; Segarra, Miren A.; Addison, Owen; Shepherd, Duncan E.T.; Attallah, Moataz M.; Grover, Liam M.; Cox, Sophie C. (Elsevier, 2018-10-13)The rise of antibiotic resistant bacterial species is driving the requirement for medical devices that minimise infection risks. Antimicrobial functionality may be achieved by modifying the implant design to incorporate a ...
Peel, Sean; Eggbeer, Dominic; Sugar, Adrian; Evans, Peter Llewellyn (Emerald, 2016)Purpose: Post-traumatic zygomatic osteotomy, fracture reduction, and orbital floor reconstruction poses many challenges for achieving a predictable, accurate, safe, and aesthetically pleasing result. This paper describes ...