Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28004318›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical research2017

Analysis of 3D Prints by X-ray Computed Microtomography and Terahertz Pulsed Imaging.

Daniel Markl, J Axel Zeitler, Cecilie Rasch, Maria Høtoft Michaelsen, Anette Müllertz, Jukka Rantanen, Thomas Rades, Johan Bøtker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Structured engineering of self-emulsifying drug delivery systems (SEDDS)International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Characterization of Pharmaceutical Tablets by X-ray Tomography.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniel MarklDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Philippa Fawcett Drive, Cambridge, CB3 0AS, UK.
J Axel ZeitlerDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Philippa Fawcett Drive, Cambridge, CB3 0AS, UK.
Cecilie RaschDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Maria Høtoft MichaelsenDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anette MüllertzDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jukka RantanenDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas RadesDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Johan BøtkerDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. johan.botker@sund.ku.dk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA 3D printer was used to realise compartmental dosage forms containing multiple active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) formulations. This work demonstrates the microstructural characterisation of 3D printed solid dosage forms using X-ray computed microtomography (XμCT) and terahertz pulsed imaging (TPI).

methodsPrinting was performed with either polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) or polylactic acid (PLA). The structures were examined by XμCT and TPI. Liquid self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery system (SNEDDS) formulations containing saquinavir and halofantrine were incorporated into the 3D printed compartmentalised structures and in vitro drug release determined.

resultsA clear difference in terms of pore structure between PVA and PLA prints was observed by extracting the porosity (5.5% for PVA and 0.2% for PLA prints), pore length and pore volume from the XμCT data. The print resolution and accuracy was characterised by XμCT and TPI on the basis of the computer-aided design (CAD) models of the dosage form (compartmentalised PVA structures were 7.5 ± 0.75% larger than designed; n = 3).

conclusionsThe 3D printer can reproduce specific structures very accurately, whereas the 3D prints can deviate from the designed model. The microstructural information extracted by XμCT and TPI will assist to gain a better understanding about the performance of 3D printed dosage forms.

Indexed as

Chemistry, PharmaceuticalComputer-Aided DesignDosage FormsDrug Delivery SystemsDrug LiberationPharmaceutical PreparationsPhenanthrenesPolyestersPolyvinyl AlcoholPorosityPrintingPrinting, Three-DimensionalTechnology, PharmaceuticalTerahertz ImagingX-Ray MicrotomographyX-RaysDosage FormshalofantrinePharmaceutical PreparationsPhenanthrenesPolyesterspoly(lactide)Polyvinyl Alcohol3D printingmicrostructurepolyvinyl alcohol (PVA)terahertz pulsed imaging (TPI)X-ray computed microtomography (XμCT)

Identifiers

PMID28004318
PMCPMC5382186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.