Qualitative Assessment of Four Types of Three-Dimensional Printed Anatomical Tibial Bone Models Compared to Commercially Available Models.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare technical and physical features of four three-dimensional printed bone models used for teaching purposes to commercial models. STUDY DESIGN: A canine tibia was imaged using computed tomography and used for model development. Tibial models were printed using Resin, polylactide acid (PLA), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and high-impact polystyrene (HIPS). They were compared with two commercial models (SAWBONES 2117 and 2108). Models were drilled in three locations and then cut transversely. Subjective quality of models, time and cost of production were compared. RESULTS: Print time was approximately 3 hours for Resin and 4 hours for each of the PLA, ABS and HIPS models. Unlike the Resin and SAWBONES, the PLA, HIPS and ABS had higher heat generation during both drilling and cutting with mild construct deformation at cut surfaces in ABS and PLA models. Characteristics of real bone during drilling and cutting were best simulated in decreasing order by Resin, PLA, ABS and HIPS followed by SAWBONES 2117 and 2108 models. Material costs were $14.6 (Resin), $0.48 (PLA/ABS), $1.52 (HIPS), $23.50 and $17.50 for SAWBONES 2117 and 2108 per model, respectively. Resin performed best and had the closest subjective tactile properties to real bone. CONCLUSION: The three-dimensional printed tibial bone models provide a cost-effective alternative to commercially available bone models in veterinary medicine as teaching models.