The covid-19 outbreak has caused a shortage of masks and other healthcare products for the general public around the globe. In addition, it has also affected the supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by healthcare services because of a sudden increase in their demand. This significant disruption in the global supply chain of these products resulted in, leaving many staff and patients without protection. The additive manufacturing (AM) industry is going through extraordinary times and can provide emergency responses to help deal with the global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of the present work is therefore to perform an up-to-date review to determine the capacity of AM to provide exclusive benefits for the medical healthcare supplies sector to fight this current situation. In this review, it is found that AM technology has proved that it can be used as a volume manufacturing technology for the ongoing crisis. However, the standardization and certification are appeared to represent the main challenges for adopting the AM in healthcare against COVID-19. Furthermore, additively manufactured materials for medical applications must be developed for medical environments. Most printed medical products for COVID-19 require biocompatibility evaluation and shall prove their ability to sterilize. Finally, this review concluded that AM technology can fulfill the requirements of face masks and ventilator parts for healthcare systems for proper controlling and treating of COVID-19 patients when the safety and efficacy of these devices are ensured.
CulmoneCSmitGBreedveldP. Additive manufacturing of medical instruments: a state-of-the-art review. Addit Manuf2019; 27: 461–473.
39.
UlmeanuMEDoicinCVBailaDI, et al. Comparative evaluation of optimum AM technology to fabricate bespoke medical prototypes of composite materials. Mater Plast2015; 52: 416–422.
40.
O’NeillKJLainaVWilsonS. Referrals between consultants. The wait to be seen in a specialist plastic surgery hand clinic. Clin Gov Int J2008; 13(4): 261–268.
41.
SinghR. Process capability analysis of fused deposition modelling for plastic components. Rapid Prototyp J2014; 20(1): 69–76.
42.
BajpaiPBajpaiM. Development of a high-performance hybrid epoxy silicone resin for coatings. Pigment Resin Technol2010; 39(2): 96–100.
43.
HaleemAJavaidM. 3D scanning applications in medical field: a literature-based review. Clin Epidemiol Glob Health2019; 7(2): 199–210.
44.
ChohanJSSinghRBoparaiKS. Thermal and surface characterization of ABS replicas made by FDM for rapid tooling applications. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24(1): 28–36.
45.
HaleemAJavaidMVaishyaR. 5D printing and its expected applications in Orthopaedics. J Clin Orthop Trauma2019; 10(4): 809–810.
46.
DrummerDCifuentes-CuéllarSRietzelD. Suitability of PLA/TCP for fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyp J2012; 18(6): 500–507.
47.
HamadKKaseemMYangHW, et al. Properties and medical applications of polylactic acid: a review. Express Polym Lett2015; 9(5): 435–455.
48.
GrassoMAzzouzLRuiz-HincapieP, et al. Effect of temperature on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed PLA tensile specimens. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24(8): 1337–1346.
49.
WangRShangJLiX, et al. Novel topological design of 3D Kagome structure for additive manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24(2): 261–269.
50.
PaulSCvan ZijlGPAGTanMJ, et al. A review of 3D concrete printing systems and materials properties: current status and future research prospects. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24(4): 784–798.
51.
JinYLiXCampbellRI, et al. Visualizing the hotspots and emerging trends of 3D printing through scientometrics. Rapid Prototyp J2018; 24(5): 801–812.
52.
JelínekFBreedveldP. Design for additive manufacture of fine medical instrumentation dragonflex case study. J Mech Des2015; 137: 111416.
Imbrie-MooreAMParkMHZhuY, et al. Quadrupling the n95 supply during the COVID-19 crisis with an innovative 3D-printed mask adaptor. Healthcare (Basel)2020; 8(3): 225.
55.
HanDHRhiJLeeJ. Development of prototypes of half-mask face pieces for Koreans using the 3D digitizing design method: a pilot study. Ann Occup Hyg2004; 48(8): 707–714.
56.
CaiMLiHShenS, et al. Customized design and 3D printing of face seal for an N95 filtering facepiece respirator. J Occup Environ Hyg2018; 15(3): 226–234.
ProvenzanoDRaoYJMiticK, et al. Rapid prototyping of reusable 3D-printed N95 equivalent respirators the George Washington University. Preprints 2020, 2020030444 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202003.0444.v1).
59.
WesemannCPieralliSFretwurstT, et al. 3D printed protective equipment during COVID-19 pandemic. Materials (Basel) 2020; 13(8): 1997.
60.
SapovalMGaultierALDel GiudiceC, et al. 3D-printed face protective shield in interventional radiology: evaluation of an immediate solution in the era of COVID-19 pandemic. Diagn Interv Imaging2020; 101(6): 413–415.
61.
LemarteleurVFouquetVLe GoffS, et al. 3D-printed protected face shields for health care workers in COVID-19 pandemic. Am J Infect Control2020; 11: 389–391.
62.
SananèsNLodiMKochA, et al. 3D-printed simulator for nasopharyngeal swab collection for COVID-19. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol2020; 278(7): 2649–2651.
63.
ArjunanAZahidSBaroutajiA, et al. 3D printed auxetic nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 sample collection. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2020; 114: 104175.
64.
FordJGoldsteinTTrahanS, et al. A 3D-printed nasopharyngeal swab for COVID-19 diagnostic testing. 3D Print Med2020; 6(1): 21.
65.
DhananiJPangGPincusJ, et al. Increasing ventilator surge capacity in COVID 19 pandemic: design, manufacture and in vitro-in vivo testing in anaesthetized healthy pigs of a rapid prototyped mechanical ventilator. BMC Res Notes2020; 13(1): 421.
66.
AyyıldızSMuratAVedatD, et al. 3D-printed splitter for use of a single ventilator on multiple patients during covid-19. 3D Print Addit Manuf2020; 7(4): 181–185.
SwennenGRJPottelLHaersPE. Custom-made 3D-printed face masks in case of pandemic crisis situations with a lack of commercially available FFP2/3 masks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg2020; 49(5): 673–677.
