Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32318685›Full record

ArticleMaterialia2020

Thermal Localization Improves the Interlayer Adhesion and Structural Integrity of 3D printed PEEK Lumbar Spinal Cages.

Cemile Basgul, Daniel W MacDonald, Ryan Siskey, Steven M Kurtz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materialia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Research progress on three-dimensional printed interbody fusion cage].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
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

4 authors.

Cemile BasgulImplant Research Center, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.
Daniel W MacDonaldImplant Research Center, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.
Ryan SiskeyImplant Research Center, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.
Steven M KurtzImplant Research Center, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.

Funding

Preventing Spinal Infection: Ultrasound Triggered ProphylaxisR01AR069119 · NIAMS · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI Flemming Forsberg, Noreen J Hickok · 2016 to 2026
$3.2M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR069119
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a potential application for polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spinal interbody fusion cages, which were introduced as an alternative to titanium cages because of their biocompatibility, radiolucency and strength. However, AM of PEEK is challenging due to high melting temperature and thermal gradient. Although fused filament fabrication (FFF) techniques have been shown to 3D print PEEK, layer delamination was identified in PEEK cages printed with a first generation FFF PEEK printer [1]. A standard cage design [2] was 3D printed with a second generation FFF PEEK printer. The effect of changing layer cooling time on FFF cages' mechanical strength was investigated by varying nozzle sizes (0.2 mm and 0.4 mm), print speeds (1500 and 2500 mm/min), and the number of cages printed in a single build (1, 4 and 8). To calculate the porosity percentage, FFF cages were micro-CT scanned prior to destructive testing. Mechanical tests were then conducted on FFF cages according to ASTM F2077 [2]. Although altering the cooling time of a layer was not able to change the failure mechanism of FFF cages, it was able to improve cages' mechanical strength. Printing a single cage per build caused a higher ultimate load than printing multiple cages per build. Regardless of the cage number printed per build, cages printed with bigger nozzle diameter achieved higher ultimate load compared to cages printed with smaller nozzle diameter. Printing with a bigger nozzle diameter resulted in less porosity, which might have an additional affect on the interlayer delamination failure mechanism.

Indexed as

3D printingFused Filament FabricationPolyetheretherketoneSpinal Cage

Identifiers

PMID32318685
PMCPMC7172383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.