Abstract:Abstract Background 3D printed patient-specific anatomical models have been applied clinically to orthopaedic care for surgical planning and patient education. The estimated cost and print time per model for 3D printers have not yet been compared with clinically representative models across multiple printing technologies. This study investigates six commercially-available 3D printers: Prusa i3 MK3S, Formlabs Form 2, Formlabs Form 3, LulzBot TAZ 6, Stratasys F370, and Stratasys J750 Digital Anatomy. Methods Seven representative orthopaedic standard tessellation models derived from CT scans were imported into the respective slicing software for each 3D printer. For each printer and corresponding print setting, the slicing software provides a print time and material use estimate. Material quantity was used to calculate estimated model cost. Print settings investigated were infill percentage, layer height, and model orientation on the print bed. The slicing software investigated are Cura LulzBot Edition 3.6.20, GrabCAD Print 1.43, PreForm 3.4.6, and PrusaSlicer 2.2.0. Results The effect of changing infill between 15% and 20% on estimated print time and material use was negligible. Orientation of the model has considerable impact on time and cost with worst-case differences being as much as 39.30% added print time and 34.56% added costs. Averaged across all investigated settings, horizontal model orientation on the print bed minimizes estimated print time for all 3D printers, while vertical model orientation minimizes cost with the exception of Stratasys J750 Digital Anatomy, in which horizontal orientation also minimized cost. Decreasing layer height for all investigated printers increased estimated print time and decreased estimated cost with the exception of Stratasys F370, in which cost increased. The difference in material cost was two orders of magnitude between the least and most-expensive printers. The difference in build rate (cm 3 /min) was one order of magnitude between the fastest and slowest printers. Conclusions All investigated 3D printers in this study have the potential for clinical utility. Print time and print cost are dependent on orientation of anatomy and the printers and settings selected. Cost-effective clinical 3D printing of anatomic models should consider an appropriate printer for the complexity of the anatomy and the experience of the printer technicians.

A Comparative Applied Study on Optimizing Printing Parameters for Six Fused Deposition Modeling Materials

Optimization of Polylactic Acid 3D Printing Parameters Based on Support Vector Regression and Cuckoo Search

Maximizing performance and efficiency in 3D printing of polylactic acid biomaterials: Unveiling of microstructural morphology, and implications of process parameters and modeling of the mechanical strength, surface roughness, print time, and print energy for fused filament fabricated (FFF) bioparts

Three dimensional printing technology and materials for treatment of elbow fractures

Effect of Printing Parameters on the Thermal and Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PLA and PETG, Using Fused Deposition Modeling

A focused simulation-based optimization of print time and material usage with respect to orientation, layer height and support settings for multi-pathological anatomical models in inverted vat photopolymerization 3D printing

Comparing cost and print time estimates for six commercially-available 3D printers obtained through slicing software for clinically relevant anatomical models

Investigation and Optimization of Effects of 3D Printer Process Parameters on Performance Parameters

Effect of Printing Parameters on the Mechanical Properties of Parts Fabricated with Open-Source 3D Printers in PLA by Fused Deposition Modeling

Predicting Mechanical Properties of Polymer Materials Using Rate-Dependent Material Models: Finite Element Analysis of Bespoke Upper Limb Orthoses

Mechanical Properties Optimization of Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone Via Fused Deposition Modeling.

3D printing PLGA: a quantitative examination of the effects of polymer composition and printing parameters on print resolution

Comparative Analysis of Mechanical and Thermal Characteristics of 3D‐Printed Polyamide using Material Extrusion and Powder Bed Fusion Process with Industrial and Desktop Printers

Compression Performance with Different Build Orientation of Fused Filament Fabrication Polylactic Acid, Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene, and Polyether Ether Ketone

An Insight into the Characteristics of 3D Printed Polymer Materials for Orthoses Applications: Experimental Study

Optimization of three-dimensional printing parameters for orthodontic applications

Effects of Printing Temperature and Filling Percentage on the Mechanical Behavior of Fused Deposition Molding Technology Components for 3D Printing

Evaluating and Comparing Flexure Strength of Dental Models Printed Using Fused Deposition Modelling, Digital Light Processing, and Stereolithography Apparatus Printers

Optimizing process parameters of fused deposition molding for 3D printing customized control of polyetheretherketone scaffolds

Effect of Printing Parameters on the Tensile Properties of 3D-Printed Polylactic Acid (PLA) Based on Fused Deposition Modeling

Optimization of Fused Deposition Modelling Acrylonitrile-co-Butadiene-co-Styrene Parameters using ANOVA and Hybrid GRA–TOPSIS