Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

83-Year-Old Woman Gets New 3D-Printed Titanium Jaw

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the will-be-next-bond-villain dept.

Medicine 121

arnodf writes "The University of Hasselt (in Belgium) announced today (Google translation of Dutch original) that Belgian and Dutch scientists have successfully replaced an 83-year-old woman's lower jaw with a 3D-printed model. According to the researchers, 'It is the first custom-made implant in the world to replace an entire lower jaw. ... The 3D printer prints titanium powder layer by layer, while a computer controlled laser ensures that the correct particles are fused together. Using 3D printing technology, less materials are needed and the production time is much shorter than traditional manufacturing. The artificial jaw is slightly heavier than a natural jaw, but the patient can easily get used to it."

cancel ×

121 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't Draw that Jaw (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921221)

You wouldn't download a jaw...

Re:Don't Draw that Jaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921247)

Jaw, whatever.

Re:Don't Draw that Jaw (1)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921323)

Jaw please!

Re:Don't Draw that Jaw (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921619)

These Jaws jokes are tearing me up!

Sign me up (1)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#38925251)

For a titanium PENIS! The womens would go CRAZY over it.

Re:Sign me up (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38925425)

And you wouldn't, because you wouldn't feel anything.
Nerd.

Sweet! (4, Funny)

tsotha (720379) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921237)

She can get a job as a heavy at Drax Industries.

Any day now... (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921269)

I'm going to be reading how someone using a 3D printer is creating their own family.

oooooh and is the Pope going to have kittens!

I think I... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921277)

already saw that Bond movie.

Re:I think I... (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923089)

already saw that Bond movie.

Flash : A dog with titanium implants is now Jaws pet.

How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (5, Interesting)

vyvepe (809573) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921301)

How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium?

Re:How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921353)

From what I understand of the jaws anatomy, it's essentially cradled inside a basket of muscles, those allow it to open/close. The tendon attachment, however, is tricky, as titanium forms a bond with bone (which grows around it) and not with tendons or ligaments.

Re:How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (5, Informative)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921717)

There some more information in the university's press release [uhasselt.be] which, handily, is also available in English translation [uhasselt.be] :

"The implant was coated with plasma sprayed artificial bone (hydroxy-apatite bone substitute compound) by Cambioceramics, Leiden, The Netherlands. Some anatomical parts, such as the condylar heads and the rims for the mandibular nerves were polished."

So I assume they attach the tendons to the faux-bone.

Re:How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922701)

Screws, clips, nails, adhesive. It's all been tried. I swear your average orthopedic surgeon spends way too much time at Home Depot coming up with ideas.

If you think I'm kidding, the first clue for me was the bolt cutters being replicated in stainless for a surgeon by a machine shop I was visiting.

Re:How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923701)

My orthopedic surgeon was a toolmaker and machinist before he decided to become a doc.

--
BMO

Re:How do they attach muscle/tendons to titanium? (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38924475)

Much of orthopedics is basically mechanics as applied to human bodies.

Why not stainless steel? (1)

lhaeh (463179) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921315)

Not just in this case, but in general for medical implants. Sure it is heavier, but it is much stronger, just as corrosion resistant, and non-magnetic.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (5, Informative)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921371)

Titanium is stronger than most stainless steels and is 2/3 of the density. Also nickle is a component of stainless steel and can cause problems in the body. Titanium is inert in the body.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921419)

Titanium is inert in the body.

For now. But I'm sure the medical malpractice attorneys who advertise in between infomercials will find a way to claim otherwise in short time.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (3)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921867)

Titanium is inert in the body.

For now. But I'm sure the medical malpractice attorneys who advertise in between infomercials will find a way to claim otherwise in short time.

Impresos en 3D el fracaso de titanio del implante? Marque cinco cinco cinco, cinco cinco cinco cinco!

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

Algae_94 (2017070) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922137)

this isn't the first time titanium has been implanted into humans. I think we would have already found out if there were problems

Re:Why not stainless steel? (2)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923215)

Titanium is routinely used for dental implants. A hole is drilled into the jaw, a titanium screw/stud screwed in, and a crown put on top. Titanium is ideal for surgical implants because bone actually grows around it, unlike other metals where bone recedes from them. For some odd reason, titanium is particularly bio-compatible, and doesn't cause any rejection issues like other materials. It's also popular for jewelry for people who are especially sensitive to other metals; it's like gold that way (gold is also hypo-allergenic), but obviously less expensive. A lot of people get rashes from stainless steel.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922487)

Titanium is inert in the body.

For now. But I'm sure the medical malpractice attorneys who advertise in between infomercials will find a way to claim otherwise in short time.

Surely you jest with such an ignorant post. I refuse to believe this post was made for teh realz.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923189)

This surgery was done in Netherlands, not the shitty lawyer-worshiping USA. They probably don't have a lot of trouble with BS medical malpractice cases over there like we do.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923271)

LOLf

almost true (2)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921453)

pure titanium is as strong as typical steels but has less weight. Steels can be made that are much stronger than titanium.

Re:almost true (4, Informative)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921597)

Pure Titanium is pretty weak with a Yield of around 20ksi. But the most common type is Grade 5 which when heat treated is good to about 150ksi yield. Most 300 series stainless especially 316 which is pretty much the most inert one is good to about 40ksi. You can get some insane Maraging steels that go to 350ksi. But working with those is a pain. The only times I've used it I had to wire EDM it.

Re:almost true (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921903)

I really hate the whole metal vs metal debates and claims. "Aluminum" x% stronger then "steel." Because no engineer doing an sort of serious design would never ever just specify "Steel", "Aluminum", "Titanium" or even "stainless steel." And even if they did they would assume that the implementor would be pick the most common alloy for that field of use.

Even worse is welding, brazing, and soldering. I have heard the following claims: "Soldering can be just as strong as brazing." "Brazing can be just as strong as welding." So can soldering be just as strong as welding?? While these claims are true because a good solder bond with a large surface area is better then a weak brazing bond over small surface area, it is simply misleading to make the claims. Also, If you can't be bother to prepare and perform a decent weld, what makes one think they will go to effort of preparing and performing a really good soldering operation.

Re:almost true (5, Informative)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922331)

I'm a mechanical engineer and I have to agree. Material selection is much more complicated than it seems. Let's take a typical aluminum parts I design.

If it is a high strength part machined from a block I'd use AL 7075-T6 since it's very strong and machines well. The T6 is an artificial aging that makes it stronger.

Sheet metal with tight bends 5052-O since other Aluminum will crack. The O means it is annealed so it's soft enough to bend cleanly.

Welded parts I'd use 6061-T6 since it's strong and welds nicely. The only problem is when you weld aluminum you anneal the area around the weld and the strength can drop from 36ksi yield to about 8ksi yield. If you really need the strength you can artificially age the part after you weld it but then the part typically warps and you have to straighten it back.

And once you have your part you have another problem with Aluminum. It's really soft. So it's easy to scratch and you can't get the surface clean because it keeps oxidizing and will rub off and make your hand black. So you can anodize it. There is a regular and a hard coat anodize if the part will be subject to wear.

These are just a few of the material selections you need to make. And this is just aluminum.

Re:almost true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38923211)

Oxidized aluminum is corundum, it is the shiny surface layer that forms on aluminum. I don't know what the black material is that keeps rubbing off. What other components are in the alloys which have that effect?

Re:almost true (1)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923347)

And lets not forget about porosity issues that can arise with cast aluminium ;-) No mater the method, making stuff can be challenging.

Re:almost true (4, Interesting)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922985)

I got a (4 Interesting) so I'll continue.

There are a couple of mechanical properties that you can generalize for a metal regardless of alloy type.

Density is pretty consistent. Aluminum is about .09 lb/in^3, Titanium .16 lb/in^3, and Steels .28 lb/in^3

But the most important one is Young's Modulus. This is basically how stiff a material is so higher is stiffer.
Aluminum is 10 Mpsi
Titanium is 16 Mpsi
Steel is 29 Mpsi

What is really freaky is that the Young's Modulus numbers are almost identical to the in proportion to the densities.

Re:almost true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38924871)

Yup. Specific stiffness is pretty consistant. Except for Beryllium. But that has issues of it's own (cancer).

Similarly freaky is how much the specific heat of materials varies dramatically (joules/gram), but when you look at from a volumetric perspective, the range decreases pretty dramatically (joules/cubic meter).

Re:almost true (2)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923233)

Nope. You need to differentiate between strength-per-volume and strength-per-weight. Per weight, titanium always wins, but pure titanium isn't that great, it's the alloys that really shine (no pun intended, especially since Ti isn't terribly shiny). 6Al4V is the normal "aerospace-grade" alloy, and is stronger per weight than any steel alloy. However, by volume I'm pretty sure it's the other way around; steel is stronger. So you can make a lighter part with the same strength as a high-strength-steel part, but it's going to be physically bigger.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

kermidge (2221646) | more than 2 years ago | (#38924803)

True that. I've now got seven stents - all titanium, for the simple reason they're strong, light, and non-reactive.

Back in '76 I over-filled my stainless Zippo; it leaked, I got one helluva leaking rash - instant "nickel allergy". To this day the only metal my body will tolerate for anything more than moderately brief contact is titanium.

As for the printed jaw, I'd be interested to see some follow-up on this - the possibilities are intriguing.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

MagikSlinger (259969) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921389)

Did you even read Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] before you posted?

Re:Why not stainless steel? (3, Funny)

soundscape (962537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921399)

Why not? That funny "stainless steel" taste, of course.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (5, Informative)

Dogbertius (1333565) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921411)

Although it is useful in medical instruments (eg: scalpels, handles, etc), and is also used in artificial heart values, the nickel components of certain types of medical/surgical stainless steel are quite reactive within the body.

Some people also naturally have considerable sensitivity to nickel outside the body too. Some people get terrible hives, rashes, and even permanent burns when wearing cheap jewelry (ie: silver plated jewelry which is made of nickel/rhodium alloys). Given such a damaging reaction when exposed to damp skin, having this inside the body could be dangerous.

Good question. Cheers! :)

Re:Why not stainless steel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38925709)

> cheap jewelry
> rhodium

rhodium is the rarest, most expensive platinum group element

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921413)

Titanium seems to be used across the board. My guess would be lower host rejection.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (4, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921433)

Uh.. why not titanium? Does she really need her jaw to be stronger than a Mig jet fighter? Does she really want her jaw to be twice as heavy as a normal jaw so that she walks around like this :0 all the time?

Re:Why not stainless steel? (5, Informative)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921931)

Titanium interacts better with bone and the body tends to tolerate it well (most artificial joints are made of titanium), is lighter that steel, and has superb sintering properties. In fact nanograin titanium oxide (a ceramic) when shaped and sintered is transparent, as light as aluminum, stronger than steel, and far more flexible than either. It is extremely heat resistant and you could in fact build a very impressive engine block out of it... and be able to tune you motor by adjust combustion until your ignition color went blue (indicating complete optimal combustion.)

You could print a very high quality bone replacement and put synthetic bone inside and out to support marrow, a blood supply and attachment points on the outside for muscle and tendon. In fact you could build anchor points for carbon fiber to replace portions of tendon, and the tendon would naturally grow into the fiber over time. With the work being done on 3D printing, Its almost certain that we'll eventually just print up actual replacement organs and tissues from our own stem cells and with a little Extracellular Matrix to make it all grow together, no scars, no complications. We truly live in amazing times!

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923325)

Ok you got me.... Tell me more. Pig bladder anyone? BTW what's the latest on regenerative therapy? I remember a while back some guy got his finger tip chopped off by a model plane prop and some pig bladder (Extracellular Matrix something) allowed his finger tip to grow back.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

oic0 (1864384) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921441)

The material price is probably a fraction of the total item cost. Might as well go with something very strong, light, and inert. Who knows, maybe it sinters better too.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921449)

Stainless is by far more common in regular surgeries, but there are pros and cons to both. I work in the OR and see both on a regular basis.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38922059)

Stainless steel uses nickel which can cause really unpleasant reactions. The body rejects it. My skin hates it, I can't even imagine what an implant would be like. I can't even wear most off-the-shelf jewelry because almost everything today is made with stainless steel. I can't wear wrist-watches - the backsides are always stainless steel. Sometimes the buttons on clothes give me problems! Ironically I got into piercings because I can wear a lot of gauged jewlery - most are made with titanium, organic (bone, wood, and shell), glass, or acrylic materials.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923275)

I can't wear wrist-watches - the backsides are always stainless steel.

Yes you can. You just need to get a all-titanium model. My mother has the same problem you do, and I got her an all-titanium Citizen wristwatch about 10 years ago. The backside is titanium too. It works great for her; the only problem is that these days, she doesn't wear it that much because she (like me) just uses her cellphone to tell the time. :-/

I'm pretty sure Citizen still has all-titanium models available, if you're still into wearing watches.

Re:Why not stainless steel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38923963)

Most medical implants are made from a Cobalt Chrome alloy called ASTM F75 coated with Titanium Nitride. They use TN because it's inert not because it's very hard. Everyone who gets an artificial hip or knee thinks it's made from titanium, but none of them are. Titanium is far to brittle for most uses.

Watch out for her grandson (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921337)

Grandma is so proud of her grandson up on the International space station. Or was it a privately owned station? I forget. It's been longer since I've seen that than some of the people on Slashdot have been alive. Shit. Just 2.5 hours to happy hour...

Glad I'm not her husband (2)

ozduo (2043408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921341)

If she wore out her old jaw nagging her old man, how many nags will it take to wear out a titanium one!

Re:Glad I'm not her husband (2)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921515)

or did they live any capp style and he wore out her jaw popping her one in the yap? this titanium jaw would be hell on the knuckles....

Experience (4, Funny)

TWX (665546) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921363)

The artificial jaw is slightly heavier than a natural jaw, but the patient can easily get used to it.

Sounds like the whole thing is a jaw-dropping experience!

On a more serious note... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921387)

I wonder if this could have been used for Roger Ebert, or did he have to have too much tissue removed to get rid of the tumor to make it pointless?

Re:On a more serious note... (2)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921975)

If I remember the story right, much of the damage he suffered in the cancer treatment was because he had some kind of unusual bleeding problem. That's why he lost his voice; they had to do a tracheotomy to keep him alive. So they probably don't want to do any non essential surgeries.

Re:On a more serious note... (2)

SethJohnson (112166) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921989)

Roger Ebert lost his jaw because of uncontrollable bleeding from a blood vessel in his jaw that was weakened due to the chemo for the thyroid cancer. It was an unexpected byproduct of the original malady.

He also says he won't undergo any more surgery, so it's unlikely he'll receive one of these jaws.

The man is a national treasure. Any filmmaker who sees their film reviewed by Roger Ebert at this point in his life should consider themselves blessed, even if his review is saying the film sucks. It's a herculean task for him to watch these movies and write reviews.

Seth

Re:On a more serious note... (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922361)

He can still type like crazy. He's on Twitter all the time and he can still write for his newspaper... so he isn't gone yet.

Bond, James Bond (4, Funny)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921405)

Richard Keil called, he wants his teeth back.

Re:Bond, James Bond (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921939)

Richard Keil called, he wants his teeth back.

Don't say that too loudly - Barbara Broccoli might send a DMCA takedown order to the University of Hasselt.

Missed oppertunity (4, Funny)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921417)

She should have had new titanium dentures built into it as well. She could have starred in the next James Bond movie.

Re:Missed oppertunity (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921951)

She's 83 - unless they're bringing Sean Connery back, she might be a tad old to play the supervillian.

Re:Missed oppertunity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38922033)

The villain? Aw hell no, she is going to be the next Bond Girl, Victoria Jawson.

Re:Missed oppertunity (1)

Metabolife (961249) | more than 2 years ago | (#38924503)

You haven't heard? They're making a remake of Dr. Who with the original cast.

They're calling it James Denture Bond: Dr. Who? Speak up!

Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921423)

How long before they can print Adamantium bone replacements?

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921537)

Damnit. Someone beat me to the obligatory.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921549)

First they have to discover adamantium.

Trust me, if the stuff existed it would be all the rage in aerospace.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921671)

Or, anywhere!

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921617)

After someone buys the rights to the name Adamantium and applies it to an alloy that would be used in bone replacements.

Adamantium is not a real substance, but the name could be applied to a substance as a marketing tool. That is the only way that I could ever see Adamantium bone replacements being made.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

barry99705 (895337) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922019)

Well they have to invent Adamantium first.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

Algae_94 (2017070) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922205)

Replacement of all your bones would eliminate the source of all your blood cells, so not a good idea. Adamantium not being real makes it rather difficult to do anyway.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923317)

Not necessarily; you could (in theory) create artificial bones that still have voids in them to contain bone marrow. Of course, implementing this in practice would be rather tricky, but if we can get to the point where we can print titanium bones in hours and also grow tissues with stem cells, it might be feasible to merge the two, growing new bone marrow inside an artificial femur or pelvis, for instance.

Re:Now that the technology has been proven... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922447)

I'd rather cover my bones in Unobtanium.

Baron Von Underbite's Mom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921463)

Baron Von Underbite's Mom?...

Or maybe the Baron was in drag all along?

Uh oh... (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921501)

Should I be worried [youtube.com] ?

This is amazing! (1)

FoolishOwl (1698506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921525)

I was under the impression that 3D printing currently only worked with a few materials, and usually was just used with plastics. But 3D printing with metal? Welcome to the future.

Re:This is amazing! (1)

Ironchew (1069966) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921649)

I was under the impression that 3D printing currently only worked with a few materials, and usually was just used with plastics. But 3D printing with metal? Welcome to the future.

Powdered metal isn't cheap.

Re:This is amazing! (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921745)

Metal powders are actually quite simple to make. (Even without resorting to mechanical production.

The real issue is that only certain metals could be sintered this way, and that for any kind of good resolution, you would a very tight beam on the laser.

For instance, aluminum would have to be sintered in a hermetically sealed build chamber filled with inert gasses.

On top of that, a sintered piece won't have the same strength as a milled piece. It would have much more in common with a hammer forged casting, and be of comparable mechanical strength for that given material.

The power of Kroll! (3, Interesting)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922837)

You also need to remove oxygen when exposing titanium metal powder to heat. You could make a bomb out of that stuff even more effective than the powdered aluminium ones. I got some sub-micron titanium powder in 1990 and the bag of powder was in a can full of argon, but even then the idiot that shipped it by air would be spending time in prison if he's done that today. To answer the GP poster, it wasn't a lot more expensive than the same mass of titanium metal (which isn't cheap). Some materials are actually cheaper to produce in powder form than in ingot form. With titanium the metal is first available as a porous sponge so producing a powder isn't necessarily more expensive than producing solid material (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kroll_process).

On top of that, a sintered piece won't have the same strength as a milled piece

That's true because it's not going to be 100% solid, but you can get to within 90% or more with laser sintering. However for this application being a little bit porous is an advantage because real bone can grow on it and into it. A bit over a decade ago researchers were treating milled titanium knee joints with hot caustic soda to make the surface porous and let bone grow into the portions that were in contact with bone.

Re:This is amazing! (1)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922007)

The trick is that they lay down a layer of metal powder, and then hit it with a laser to melt it into place.

shapeways.com (1)

sirwired (27582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922563)

The company shapeways.com will print print stainless steel for you for relatively cheap. (They do plastic, stainless steel, aluminum, sterling silver, ceramic, and glass.) I have the world's most awesome set of dungeon-crawling dice (bronze-finish stainless) that my wife gave me from that place.

amazing but having hard time with that first claim (2)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921555)

replacements for jaws are decades old (though not 3D model), I used to work in IT for dental practice network and replacements for war veterans who had them destroyed is something I remember.

Another victim of a bad summary.... (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921995)

In TFA, the novelty they are alluding to is this is the first 3D printed replacement, not the first replacement.

TFA mentions that compared to the current method, they can have a replacement in 4 hours, compared to several or more days.

I can imagine that this can allow the surgeon to tweak the model for the individual patient better.

Speed (1)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923385)

TFA mentions that compared to the current method, they can have a replacement in 4 hours

That's almost fast enough that they could request a change to the part during surgery. OK, maybe off by a factor of 4 to 10.

Re:Another victim of a bad summary.... (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 2 years ago | (#38924073)

TFA mentions that compared to the current method, they can have a replacement in 4 hours

Having personally executed through the process of using CT scans to produce 1:1 computer models of bones that can then be printed with a rapid prototyper, I can assure you that you cannot have a replacement in just 4 hours. Oh, sure, it can be 4 hours from when you start the machine to when the part is finished printing, but you cannot go from presurgical CT scan to part model to printed part to cleaned, polished, (coated with bone, according to the article) quality checked, packaged, sterilized, and ready for surgery in 4 hours. 4 days minimum, and probably closer to 4 weeks.

It's still really cool, though.

Re:Another victim of a bad summary.... (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38925421)

In lieu of my limited knowledge, I'll tentatively take your word for that.

My intent was to clear up some perceived confusion exhibited by the poster of the comment I replied to, thus the title was 'Another victim of a bad summary...'.

I do appreciate your reply, as it gives me a reason for research to satisfy my own curiosity.

This stuff [TFA] is so far out of my league, that is almost like sorcery to me.
I was trained/educated as a Veterinary Technician, State Board(TM) certified in Oklahoma, and worked at OSU in that capacity for a while, so I am not clueless, but this stuff is....whew!...Wow!, to me. :-)

I'm no longer in that field, but it still interests me, and I like to keep up with the current tech.

I personally think this process shows a lot of promise.
It is a 'young' technology after-all, with much improvement and refinement waiting in the wings.

prints titanium powder layer by layer (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921677)

Yes I would download a car!

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38921885)

Baroness Von Underbite

TCO (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 2 years ago | (#38921967)

How much is the printer, and what do the cartridges cost?

Re:TCO (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922879)

No cartridges yet - it's muzzle loading.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing)

X-Men coming soon (1)

neonv (803374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922173)

Any way I could get this, for say, all my bones? Some retractable claws would be nice too ...

Look out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38922301)

Quick! Somebody get Eric Lindros on the line. There might finally be a cure for his glass jaw.

what about recycle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38922467)

When inevitably (hopefully many, many years from now) this woman will pass away, will the titanium be recycled?

jaw-dropping? (1)

mpbrede (820514) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922599)

No comment on the wight at all?

Re:jaw-dropping? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38923037)

No, but perhaps some for ghasts, shades, spectres, vampires, and liches.

Star Trek tech is closer than we think (1)

GLMDesigns (2044134) | more than 2 years ago | (#38922883)

Building a jaw like this is pretty damn close to a replicator: take the raw material and make something new from it.

The coming 3D printing disruption (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38923439)

3D printing is going to revolutionize the world. We are in a Moore's law-esque curve with the cost and capabilities of printers. They have already moved into the price range of a home computer (maker bot) and will soon sport the capability to print in combinations of varying arrays of materials. We're very quickly going to move from machines printing with one or two materials, largely either metal or plastic, into combinations of dozens, and then hundreds of materials. As we go, we'll also see the printing of biological devices (ie printing cells to scaffolding). Combined with research into stem cells and regenerative medicine, I expect the next 20 years to see a simultaneous,. interconnected revolution in manufacturing and biotechnology.

I just hope I live long enough to take advantage. Just as I get to the age where my organs start to fail, I want science to deliver customized printable organs.

while i tend to agree... i also think (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38923671)

that i myself dont really need much stuff 3d printed.
i need to pay rent, pay for food, and pay for transportation, and heat/cooling.

3d printing really doesnt help me do any of these things. i cannot 3d print food. i cannot 3d print land. i cannot 3d print fuel or energy.

it will revolutionize a lot of things, but what will it do to the economy? even more unemployment, even less chance for anyone to move up the social ladder and rise out of subsitence poverty and wage slavery.

Re:while i tend to agree... i also think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38925685)

You can 3d-print food: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIFi8but3Vw

Nice! (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38924425)

I bet she can really take a punch now!

don't buy into the myth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38925211)

its not the printer, its the ink is where they stick it to ya :)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>