Dataset Information

Needle penetration test - qualifying examination of 3D printable silicones for vascular models in surgical practice.

ABSTRACT:

Background

During cardiogenic shock blood circulation is minimal in the human body and does not suffice to survive. The extracorporeal life support system (ECLS) acts as a miniature heart-lung-machine that can be temporarily implanted over major vessels e.g. at the groin of the patient to bridge cardiogenic shock. To perform this procedure in an emergency, a proper training model is desirable. Therefore, a 3-dimensional-printable (3D) material must be found that mimics large vessel needle penetration properties. A suitable test bench for material comparison is desirable.

Methods

A test setup was built, which simulated the clinically relevant wall tension in specimens. The principle was derived from an existing standardized needle penetration test. After design, the setup was fabricated by means of 3D printing and mounted onto an universal testing machine. For testing the setup, a 3D printable polymer with low Shore A hardness and porcine aorta were used. The evaluation was made by comparing the curves of the penetration force to the standardized test considering the expected differences.

Results

3D printing proved to be suitable for manufacturing the test setup, which finally was able to mimic wall tension as if under blood pressure and penetration angle. The force displacement diagrams showed the expected curves and allowed a conclusion to the mechanical properties of the materials. Although the materials forces deviated between the porcine aorta and the Agilus30 polymer, the graphs showed similar but still characteristic curves.

Conclusions

The test bench provided the expected results and was able to show the differences between the two materials. To improve the setup, limitations has been discussed and changes can be implemented without complications.

SUBMITTER: von Steuben T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8362236 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDifferent 3D-printed materials polyactic acid (PLA), polyamide (PA), polycarbonates (PC), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and GreenTEC Pro®I have been considered for surgical templates, but there is a sparity of data about how these materials are affected by steam sterilization. The aim of the current study was to test if and how these materials change morphologically when high temperature, pressure and humidity are applied during the steam sterilization process. The overall aim is to create patient-specific sawing templates for performing corrective osteotomies. After the designing process, test-specimens with five different materials: PLA, PC, ABS, PA and GreenTEC Pro® were 3D-printed in two filling grades (30 and 100%). The FDM method was used for printing. After 3D-printing, the test-specimens were steam sterilized with a standard program lasting 20 min, at a temperature of 121 °C and a pressure of 2-3 bar. In order to measure the deviation of the printed model, we measured the individual test-specimens before and after steam sterilization using a sliding gauge.ResultsPC, PA and ABS showed great morphological deviations from the template after 3D-printing and steam sterilization (> 1%) respectively. ABS proved unsuitable for steam sterilization. PLA and GreenTEC Pro® demonstrated fewer morphological deviations both before and after sterilization. Therefore, we decided to perform a second test just with PLA and Green-TEC Pro® to find out which material has the highest stability and is probably able to be used for clinical application. The smallest deviations were found with the GreenTEC Pro® solid body. After autoclaving, the specimens showed a deviation from the planned body and remained below the 1% limit.ConclusionSteam sterilization causes morphological deviations in 3D printed objects. GreenTEC Pro® seems to be a suitable material for clinical use, not only for intraoperative use, but also for precise modeling. Microbiological examination, as well as biomechanical tests, should be performed to further assess whether intraoperative use is possible.