Article3D printing in medicine2021
Reusability of autoclaved 3D printed polypropylene compared to a glass filled polypropylene composite.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Repeated Autoclave on Hardness and Tensile Strength of Polypropylene/Natural Rubber Developed for Rubber Dam Clamp.Polymers · 2025Article
- The Flexural Strength and the Effect of the Autoclave Sterilization of Polypropylene/Natural Rubber Blended Materials.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- 3D printing of polypropylene reinforced with hemp fibers: Mechanical, water absorption and morphological properties.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Advanced Composite Materials Utilized in FDM/FFF 3D Printing Manufacturing Processes: The Case of Filled Filaments.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Design of a syringe extension device (Chloe SED®) for low-resource settings in sub-Saharan Africa: a circular economy approach.Frontiers in medical technology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Health care waste can be a costly expenditure for facilities as specific disposal methods must be used to prevent the spread of pathogens. If more multi-use medical devices were available, it could potentially relieve some of this burden; however, sterilization between uses is important in preventing disease transmission. 3D printing has the ability to easily create custom medical devices at a low cost, but the majority of filaments utilized cannot survive steam sterilization. Polypropylene (PP) can withstand autoclave temperatures, but is difficult to print as it warps and shrinks during printing; however, a composite PP filament reduces these effects. Commercially available PP and glass filled PP (GFPP) filaments were successfully 3D printed into 30 × 30 × 30 mm cubes with no shrinking or warping and were autoclaved. The 134 °C autoclave temperature was too high as several cubes melted after two to three rounds, but both PP and GFPP cubes displayed minimal changes in mass and volume after one, four, seven, and ten rounds of autoclaving at 121 °C. GFPP cubes autoclaved zero, four, seven, and ten times had significantly smaller average compressive stress values compared to all PP groups, but the GFPP cubes autoclaved once were only less than PP cubes autoclaved zero, seven and ten times. GFPP cubes autoclaved zero, one, four, and seven times also deformed less indicating that the embedded glass fibers provided additional strength. While a single method was found that successfully printed PP and GFPP cubes that were able to survive up to ten rounds of autoclaving, future work should include further investigation into the mechanical properties and increasing the number of autoclave rounds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.