ReviewProgress in biomaterials2023
Mechanical performance and bioactivation of 3D-printed PEEK for high-performance implant manufacture: a review.
Review in Progress in biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three dimensional printed patient-specific PEEK versus titanium mesh cage for anterior column reconstruction after spondylectomy for spinal tumours: a prospective controlled cohort study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Functional Materials for Additive Manufacturing: Materials Design, Processing, and Emerging Applications.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparing Laboratory and Synchrotron X-Ray CT for Structural Analysis of PEEK Orthopedic Implants.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Feasibility and Surgical Outcomes of a 3D-Printed Template-Based PMMA Implant Workflow for Genioplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Biomechanical effect of implant thickness and screw diameter on CFR-PEEK subperiosteal implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clinical implementation of an EU MDR-compliant point-of-care manufacturing framework for patient-specific 3D-printed PEEK implants in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction.3D printing in medicine · 2026Article
- Influence of fused deposition modeling parameters on the mechanical and thermal properties of 3D-printed PEEK dental endosseous implants.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2026Article
- Surface Modification of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) via Femtosecond Laser Microprocessing for Enhanced Bioactivity: A Preliminary Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Fabrication and Characterization of a Porous TiOACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Patient-specific 3D-Printed PEEK implants for spinal tumor surgery.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Generation of Customized Bone Implants from CT Scans Using FEA and AM.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Exploring the mechanical strength, antimicrobial performance, and bioactivity of 3D-printed silicon nitride-PEEK composites in cervical spinal cages.International journal of bioprinting · 2024Article
- High-Cycle Fatigue Behaviour of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Produced by Additive Manufacturing.Polymers · 2023Article
- Antimicrobial Peptide Conjugated on Graphene Oxide-Containing Sulfonated Polyetheretherketone Substrate for Effective Antibacterial Activities againstAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Current applications of 3-dimensional printing in spine surgery.Journal of orthopaedics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has stood out as the leading high-performance thermoplastic for the replacement of metals in orthopaedic, trauma and spinal implant applications due to its high biocompatibility and mechanical properties. Despite its potential for custom-made medical devices, 3D-printed PEEK's mechanical performance depends on processing parameters and its bioinertness may hinder bone opposition to the implant. Concerning these challenges, this review focuses on the available literature addressing the improvement of the mechanical performance of PEEK processed through "fused filament fabrication" (FFF) along with literature on bioactivation of PEEK for improved osseointegration. The reviewed research suggests that improvements can be achieved in mechanical performance of 3D-printed PEEK with adequate FFF parametrization while different bioactivation techniques can be used to improve the bioperformance of 3D-printed PEEK. The adequate approaches towards these procedures can increase PEEK's potential for the manufacture of high-performance custom-made implantable devices that display improved bone-implant integration and prevent stress shielding of the treated bone.
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.