IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v68y2020ics0301420720301938.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

3D printable biomaterials for orthopedic implants: Solution for sustainable and circular economy

Author

Listed:
  • Yadav, Dinesh
  • Garg, Ramesh Kumar
  • Ahlawat, Akash
  • Chhabra, Deepak

Abstract

In the last few years, 3d printable biomaterials has been tremendously utilized in the fabrication of orthopaedic implants because of its light weight, minimum material wastage, porous structure for tissue growth, ease of making patient specific and any complex topology implants. The sustainability of 3D printing technique along with using sustainable biomaterials made the development of implants more accurate, compatible with human body along with 3 R's i.e. reduce, reuse and recyclable. This R-framework includes three methods of rising circular economy which make orthopedics healthcare more capable beyond the limits of traditional strategies and results on demand patient specific implant production with increased durability Operation Management apart from 3R concept also use ReSOLVE framework i.e. Regenerate, Share, Optimize, Loop, Virtualize and Exchange to organize circularity principles in business model. In this work, 3D printable and traditional materials are classified on the basis of sustainability and circularity concept. The permanent metallic biomaterials and the resorbables biomaterials have been comprehensively reviewed with the emphasis on reutilization, biocompatibility and mechanical properties. The 95% of the orthopaedic implants still using metallic biomaterials because of their high ultimate tensile strength (UTS), fatigue strength, durability and toughness. Advance surface treatments are needed to make metallic materials implants biocompatible. It is observed that bioresorbable implants are the solution for sustainability as compare to permanent biomaterials. The main concern of the bioresorbable implants is the low UTS, which limits its usage only for soft bones and not for long bones where higher UTS is a necessity. The 3D printed implants have low fatigue strength because of imperfections. For longer bones, more 3D printable bioresorbable materials need to be developed with higher UTS, toughness and fatigue strength so as to broaden their application base. These 3D printable bioresorbable materials will make orthopaedic industry more sustainable and oriented towards circular economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Yadav, Dinesh & Garg, Ramesh Kumar & Ahlawat, Akash & Chhabra, Deepak, 2020. "3D printable biomaterials for orthopedic implants: Solution for sustainable and circular economy," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:68:y:2020:i:c:s0301420720301938
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420720301938
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101767?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Despeisse, M. & Baumers, M. & Brown, P. & Charnley, F. & Ford, S.J. & Garmulewicz, A. & Knowles, S. & Minshall, T.H.W. & Mortara, L. & Reed-Tsochas, F.P. & Rowley, J., 2017. "Unlocking value for a circular economy through 3D printing: A research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 75-84.
    2. Gebler, Malte & Schoot Uiterkamp, Anton J.M. & Visser, Cindy, 2014. "A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 158-167.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luthra, Sunil & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Sarkis, Joseph & Tseng, Ming-Lang, 2022. "Resources melioration and the circular economy: Sustainability potentials for mineral, mining and extraction sector in emerging economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Hettiarachchi, Biman Darshana & Brandenburg, Marcus & Seuring, Stefan, 2022. "Connecting additive manufacturing to circular economy implementation strategies: Links, contingencies and causal loops," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    3. Carlotta D’Alessandro & Katarzyna Szopik-Depczyńska & Małgorzata Tarczyńska-Łuniewska & Cecilia Silvestri & Giuseppe Ioppolo, 2024. "Exploring Circular Economy Practices in the Healthcare Sector: A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-19, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaya Priyadarshini & Rajesh Kr Singh & Ruchi Mishra & Surajit Bag, 2022. "Investigating the interaction of factors for implementing additive manufacturing to build an antifragile supply chain: TISM-MICMAC approach," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 567-588, June.
    2. Holzmann, Patrick & Breitenecker, Robert J. & Schwarz, Erich J. & Gregori, Patrick, 2020. "Business model design for novel technologies in nascent industries: An investigation of 3D printing service providers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    3. Naghshineh, Bardia & Ribeiro, André & Jacinto, Celeste & Carvalho, Helena, 2021. "Social impacts of additive manufacturing: A stakeholder-driven framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    4. Rayna, Thierry & Striukova, Ludmila, 2021. "Assessing the effect of 3D printing technologies on entrepreneurship: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    5. Claudia Schilkowski & Manish Shukla & Sonal Choudhary, 2020. "Quantifying the circularity of regional industrial waste across multi-channel enterprises," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 385-408, July.
    6. Inês Ribeiro & Florinda Matos & Celeste Jacinto & Hafiz Salman & Gonçalo Cardeal & Helena Carvalho & Radu Godina & Paulo Peças, 2020. "Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Additive Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-22, January.
    7. Lai, Kee-hung & Feng, Yunting & Zhu, Qinghua, 2023. "Digital transformation for green supply chain innovation in manufacturing operations," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Federica Murmura & Laura Bravi & Gilberto Santos, 2021. "Sustainable Process and Product Innovation in the Eyewear Sector: The Role of Industry 4.0 Enabling Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Inês A. Ferreira & Radu Godina & Helena Carvalho, 2020. "Waste Valorization through Additive Manufacturing in an Industrial Symbiosis Setting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Dmitriy Grigorievich Rodionov* & Evgenii Alexandrovich Konnikov & Olga Anatolievna Konnikova, 2018. "Approaches to Ensuring the Sustainability of Industrial Enterprises of Different Technological Levels," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, pages 277-282:3.
    11. Francesco Cappa & Fausto Del Sette & Darren Hayes & Federica Rosso, 2016. "How to Deliver Open Sustainable Innovation: An Integrated Approach for a Sustainable Marketable Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Florinda Matos & Radu Godina & Celeste Jacinto & Helena Carvalho & Inês Ribeiro & Paulo Peças, 2019. "Additive Manufacturing: Exploring the Social Changes and Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Karna Ramachandraiah, 2021. "Potential Development of Sustainable 3D-Printed Meat Analogues: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    14. Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Raimund Bleischwitz, 2020. "Business models for environmental sustainability: Contemporary shortcomings and some perspectives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3352-3369, December.
    15. Berns, John P. & Jia, Yankun & Gondo, Maria, 2022. "Crowdfunding success in sustainability-oriented projects: An exploratory examination of the crowdfunding of 3D printers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. Marić, Josip & Opazo-Basáez, Marco & Vlačić, Božidar & Dabić, Marina, 2023. "Innovation management of three-dimensional printing (3DP) technology: Disclosing insights from existing literature and determining future research streams," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Gianmarco Bressanelli & Federico Adrodegari & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Vinit Parida, 2022. "Towards the Smart Circular Economy Paradigm: A Definition, Conceptualization, and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, April.
    18. Nazanin Hosseini Arian & Alireza Pooya & Fariborz Rahimnia & Ali Sibevei, 2021. "Assessment the effect of rapid prototyping implementation on supply chain sustainability: a system dynamics approach," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 467-493, December.
    19. Kajikawa, Yuya & Mejia, Cristian & Wu, Mengjia & Zhang, Yi, 2022. "Academic landscape of Technological Forecasting and Social Change through citation network and topic analyses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    20. Tilman Santarius & Johanna Pohl & Steffen Lange, 2020. "Digitalization and the Decoupling Debate: Can ICT Help to Reduce Environmental Impacts While the Economy Keeps Growing?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:68:y:2020:i:c:s0301420720301938. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.