Skip to main content

Additive manufacturing to veterinary practice: recovery of bony defects after the osteosarcoma resection in canines

Biomedical Engineering Letters volume 9, pages 97–108 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

The paper outlines the achievements and challenges in the additive manufacturing (AM) application to veterinary practice. The state-of-the-art in AM application to the veterinary surgery is presented, with the focus of AM for patient-specific implants manufacturing. It also provides critical discussion on some of the potential issues design and technology should overcome for wider and more effective implementation of additively manufactured parts in veterinary practices. Most of the discussions in present paper are related to the metallic implants, manufactured in this case using so-called powder bed additive manufacturing (PB-AM) in titanium alloy Ti–6AL–4V, and to the corresponding process of their design, manufacturing and implementation in veterinary surgery. Procedures of the implant design and individualization for veterinary surgery are illustrated basing on the four performed surgery cases with dog patients. Results of the replacement surgery in dogs indicate that individualized additively manufactured metallic implants significantly increase chances for successful recovery process, and AM techniques present a viable alternative to amputation in a large number of veterinary cases. The same time overcoming challenges of implant individualization in veterinary practice significantly contributes to the knowledge directly relevant to the modern medical practice. An experience from veterinary cases where organ-preserving surgery with 3D-printed patient-specific implants is performed provides a unique opportunity for future development of better human implants.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

References

  1. The social and economic value of pets to human society, The Telegraph (UK). 2017. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pets/news-features/social-economic-value-pets-human-society/.

  2. Hall S, Dolling L, Bristow K, Fuller T, Mills D. Companion animal economics. The economic impact of companion animals in the UK. S CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International), Paperback. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781786391728.0000.

  3. Saunders J, Parast L, Babey SH, Miles JV. Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: implications for human-animal interaction research and policy. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0179494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Herzog H. The impact of pets on human health and psychological well-being fact, fiction, or hypothesis? Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2011;20(4):236–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cutt H, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, Timperio A, Bull F. Understanding dog owners’ increased levels of physical activity: results from RESIDE. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(1):66–9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2006.103499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shiloh S, Sorekt G, Terkel J. Reduction of state-anxiety by petting animals in a controlled laboratory experiment. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2010;16(4):387–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/1061580031000091582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beetz A, Uvnäs-Moberg K, Julius H, Kotrschal K. Psychosocial and psychophysiological effects of human–animal interactions: the possible role of oxytocin. Front Psychol. 2012;3:234.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nimer J, Lundahl B. Animal-assisted therapy: a meta-analysis. Anthrozoos. 2007;20(3):225–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Herderick E. Additive manufacturing of metals: a review, vol 2; 2011. p. 1413–1425.

  10. Koptyug A, Rännar L, Bäckström M, Cronskär M. Additive manufacturing for medical and biomedical applications: advances and challenges. In: Materials science forum; 2014. p. 1286–1291.

  11. Kolomiets A, Popov V, Strokin E, Muller G, Kovalevsky A. Benefits of additive manufacturing for industrial design development. Trends, limitations and applications. Glob J Res Eng. 2018;18(2).

  12. Popov VV, Muller-Kamskii G, Kovalevsky A, et al. Design and 3D-printing of titanium bone implants: brief review of approach and clinical cases. Biomed Eng Lett. 2018;8:337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-018-0080-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Harrysson OLA, Marcellin-Little DJ, Horn TJ. Applications of metal additive manufacturing in veterinary orthopedic surgery. JOM J Miner Met Mater Soc. 2015;67(3):647–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Song C, Wang A, Wu Z, Chen Z, Yang Y, Wang D. The design and manufacturing of a titanium alloy beak for Grus japonensis using additive manufacturing. Mater Des. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.11.092.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nickels L. Positive prognosis for 3D printed animal implants. Metal Powder Rep. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mprp.2018.02.036.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Osmar R. Veterinary additive manufacturing: development of a prosthesis of a toucan’s bill. In: Conference: RAPID 2015; 2015.

  17. Horal M. 3D printing implants for fracture healing studies in rats. Department of Biomedical Engineering. 2015. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284315910. http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=8310516&fileOId=8310520.

  18. Boston SE, Skinner OT. Limb shortening as a strategy for limb sparing treatment of appendicular osteosarcoma of the distal radius in a dog. Vet Surg. 2018;47:136–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.12726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mitchell KE, Boston SE, Kung M, Dry S, Straw RC, Ehrhart NP, Ryan SD. Outcomes of limb-sparing surgery using two generations of metal endoprosthesis in 45 dogs with distal radial osteosarcoma. A veterinary society of surgical oncology retrospective study. Vet Surg. 2016;45:36–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.12423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Seguin B, O’Donnell MD, Walsh PJ, Selmic LE. Long-term outcome of dogs treated with ulnar rollover transposition for limb-sparing of distal radial osteosarcoma: 27 limbs in 26 dogs. Vet Surg. 2017;46:1017–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.12698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. MacDonald TL, Schiller TD. Limb-sparing surgery using tantalum metal endoprosthesis in a dog with osteosarcoma of the distal radius. Can Vet J. 2010;51:497–500.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nazarali A, Singh A, Morrison S, Gibson TWG, Rousseau J, Weese JS, Boston SE. Comparison of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius adherence to 2 canine limb salvage endoprosthesis implants. Can Vet J. 2017;58:964–6.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Quinn-Gorham DM, Khan JM. Thinking outside of the box: the potential of 3D printing in veterinary medicine. J Vet Sci Technol. 2016;7:360. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7579.1000360.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Koptyug A, Rännar L, Bäckström M, Fager Franzén S, Dérand P. Additive manufacturing technology applications targeting practical surgery. Int J Life Sci Med Res. 2013;3(1):15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Heinl P, Müller L, Körner C, Singer RF, Müller FA. Cellular Ti–6Al–4V structures with interconnected macro porosity for bone implants fabricated by selective electron beam melting. Acta Biomater. 2008;4(5):1536–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Renishaw. Case study “Additive manufacturing in veterinary surgery—saving a well-loved member of the family”. http://resources.renishaw.com/en/download/case-study-additive-manufacturing-in-veterinary-surgery-saving-a-well-loved-member-of-the-family--98590.

  27. Aikman S, McGee J, Meile A, Powell B, Gogard J, Bitter T. “Puppy prosthetic—custom 3D printed dog prosthetic”, P17061. http://edge.rit.edu/edge/P17061/public/Customer%20Handoff%20and%20Final%20Project%20Documentation/MSD_Final_Paper_ver2_4_25_17.pdf.

  28. Bachman N, Lasso M, Olaode O, Walfield E, Zuhairi MA. Design of a prosthesis for canines with front limb deformities. A Major Qualifying Project Report submitted to the faculty of Worcester Polytechnic Institute in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science. 2017. https://web.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042717-151238/unrestricted/MQPReport.pdf.

  29. Ruppert DS, Harrysson OLA, Marcellin-Little DJ, Dahners LE, Weinhold PS. Improved osseointegration with as-built electron beam melted textured implants and improved peri-implant bone volume with whole body vibration. Med Eng Phys. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2018.05.003.

    Google Scholar 

  30. ASTM F1472-14, Standard specification for wrought titanium–6aluminum–4vanadium alloy for surgical implant applications (UNS R56400). West Conshohocken: ASTM International; 2014. https://www.astm.org/Standards/F1472.htm.

  31. ASTM E466 - 07, Standard practice for conducting force controlled constant amplitude axial fatigue tests of metallic materials. https://www.astm.org/DATABASE.CART/HISTORICAL/E466-07.htm.

  32. ASTM E23 - Standard test methods for notched bar impact testing of metallic materials. https://www.astm.org/Standards/E23.

  33. Surmeneva MA, Surmenev R, Chudinova EA, Koptioug A, Tkachev MS, Gorodzha SN, Rännar L. Fabrication of multiple-layered gradient cellular metal scaffold via electron beam melting for segmental bone reconstruction. Mater Des. 2017;133:195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Regis M, Marin E, Fedrizzi L, Pressacco M. Additive manufacturing of trabecular titanium orthopedic implants. MRS Bull. 2015;40(02):137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Xiong Y, Zhao Y, Wang Z, Du Q, Chen W, Wang A. Comparison of a new minimum contact locking plate and the limited contact dynamic compression plate in an osteoporotic fracture model. Int Orthop. 2009;33(5):1415–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0713-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Boyer R, Welsch G, Collings EW. Materials properties handbook: titanium alloys. Metals Park: ASM International; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Metals handbook, volume 2—properties and selection: nonferrous alloys and special-purpose materials, 10th edn. ASM International; 1990.

  38. Metals handbook, volume 3, properties and selection: stainless steels, tool materials and special-purpose metals, ninth edition, ASM Handbook Committee. Materials Park: American Society for Metals; 1980.

  39. Holt JM, Ho CY, editors. Structural alloys handbook, 1996 edition. West Lafayette: CINDAS/Purdue University; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Popov V, Katz-Demyanetz A, Garkun A, Muller G, Strokin E, Rosenson H. Effect of hot isostatic pressure treatment on the electron-beam melted Ti–6Al–4V specimens. Procedia Manuf. 2018;21:125–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Popov VV Jr, Katz-Demyanetz A, Garkun A, Bamberger M. The effect of powder recycling on the mechanical properties and microstructure of electron beam melted Ti–6Al–4V specimens. Addit Manuf. 2018;22:834–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.06.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors want to thank Dr. Jorge Leite, Bonematrix (Portugal) for fruitful joint work on the 4th case and conducting the challenging surgery; Haim Rosenson and Dr. Jean Ramon for support of biomedical activities in Israel Institute of Metals (IIM); the IIM team for conducting all the necessary 3D printing and testing activities.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Israel Institute of Metals, Technion R&D Foundation, 32000, Technion City, Haifa, Israel

    Vladimir V. Popov Jr., Gary Muller-Kamskii, Alexander Katz-Demyanetz & Aleksey Kovalevsky

  2. Veterinary Clinic Ortho-Vet, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

    Stas Usov

  3. Veterinary Clinic Beliy Klyk, Moscow, Russia

    Dmitrii Trofimcow

  4. Polygon Medical Engineering, Moscow, Russia

    Georgy Dzhenzhera

  5. Sports Tech Research Centre, Mid Sweden University, Akademigatan 1, Östersund, Sweden

    Andrey Koptyug

Authors
  1. Vladimir V. Popov Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gary Muller-Kamskii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexander Katz-Demyanetz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aleksey Kovalevsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stas Usov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dmitrii Trofimcow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Georgy Dzhenzhera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Andrey Koptyug
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladimir V. Popov Jr..

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained in Russia (cases 1–3) and Portugal (case 4) according to the local guidelines for the care and use of animals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Popov, V.V., Muller-Kamskii, G., Katz-Demyanetz, A. et al. Additive manufacturing to veterinary practice: recovery of bony defects after the osteosarcoma resection in canines. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 9, 97–108 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-018-00092-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-018-00092-7

Keywords

  • Additive manufacturing
  • Ti–6Al–4V
  • Implants
  • Veterinary applications of 3D printing
  • Clinical cases
  • Osteosarcoma
  • Dogs