Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33297551›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Selective Laser Melting and Electron Beam Melting of Ti6Al4V for Orthopedic Applications: A Comparative Study on the Applied Building Direction.

Paola Ginestra, Rosalba Monica Ferraro, Keren Zohar-Hauber, Andrea Abeni, Silvia Giliani, Elisabetta Ceretti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. 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. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Paola GinestraDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Rosalba Monica FerraroInstitute of Molecular Medicine "Angelo Nocivelli", Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Keren Zohar-HauberMetallurgical and Powders Technologies Lab, Institute of Metals, Technion City, Haifa 320003, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-1485-8118
Andrea AbeniDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Silvia GilianiInstitute of Molecular Medicine "Angelo Nocivelli", Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8137-4642
Elisabetta CerettiDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.

Funding

Ministero degli Affari Esteri e della Cooperazione Internazionale D16C18001710006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 3D printing process offers several advantages to the medical industry by producing complex and bespoke devices that accurately reproduce customized patient geometries. Despite the recent developments that strongly enhanced the dominance of additive manufacturing (AM) techniques over conventional methods, processes need to be continually optimized and controlled to obtain implants that can fulfill all the requirements of the surgical procedure and the anatomical district of interest. The best outcomes of an implant derive from optimal compromise and balance between a good interaction with the surrounding tissue through cell attachment and reduced inflammatory response mainly caused by a weak interface with the native tissue or bacteria colonization of the implant surface. For these reasons, the chemical, morphological, and mechanical properties of a device need to be designed in order to assure the best performances considering the in vivo environment components. In particular, complex 3D geometries can be produced with high dimensional accuracy but inadequate surface properties due to the layer manufacturing process that always entails the use of post-processing techniques to improve the surface quality, increasing the lead times of the whole process despite the reduction of the supply chain. The goal of this work was to provide a comparison between Ti6Al4V samples fabricated by selective laser melting (SLM) and electron beam melting (EBM) with different building directions in relation to the building plate. The results highlighted the influence of the process technique on osteoblast attachment and mineralization compared with the building orientation that showed a limited effect in promoting a proper osseointegration over a long-term period.

Indexed as

building orientationelectron beam meltingosseointegrationpowder bed fusionselective laser meltingtitanium

Identifiers

PMID33297551
PMCPMC7729448

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.