3D printing for membrane separation, desalination and water treatment

© 2019 Elsevier Ltd Additive manufacturing or commonly known as 3D printing is driving innovation in many industries and academic research including the water resource sector. The capability of 3D printing to fabricate complex objects in a fast and cost-effective manner makes it highly desirable over conventional manufacturing processes. Recent years have seen a rapid increase in research using 3D printing for membrane separation, desalination and water purification applications, potentially revolutionizing this field. This review focuses on recent advancements in 3D-printed materials and methods for water-related applications including developments in module spacers, novel filtration and desalination membranes, adsorbents, water remediation, solar steam generation materials, catalysis, etc. The emergence of new 3D printers with higher printing resolution, better efficiency, faster speed, and wider material applicability has garnered more interest and can potentially reshape research and development in this field. The promising potential, challenges and future prospects of 3D printing, additive manufacturing, and materials for water resource and treatment-related applications are all discussed in this review

Three-dimensional bio-printing and bone tissue engineering: technical innovations and potential applications in maxillofacial reconstructive surgery

Background Bone grafting has been considered the gold standard for hard tissue reconstructive surgery and is widely used for large mandibular defect reconstruction. However, the midface encompasses delicate structures that are surrounded by a complex bone architecture, which makes bone grafting using traditional methods very challenging. Three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting is a developing technology that is derived from the evolution of additive manufacturing. It enables precise development of a scaffold from different available biomaterials that mimic the shape, size, and dimension of a defect without relying only on the surgeon’s skills and capabilities, and subsequently, may enhance surgical outcomes and, in turn, patient satisfaction and quality of life. Review This review summarizes different biomaterial classes that can be used in 3D bioprinters as bioinks to fabricate bone scaffolds, including polymers, bioceramics, and composites. It also describes the advantages and limitations of the three currently used 3D bioprinting technologies: inkjet bioprinting, micro-extrusion, and laser-assisted bioprinting. Conclusions Although 3D bioprinting technology is still in its infancy and requires further development and optimization both in biomaterials and techniques, it offers great promise and potential for facial reconstruction with improved outcome