Stereolithography In Additive Manufacturing And Its Biomedical Applications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69980/ajpr.v28i1.805Keywords:
Stereolithography (SLA), Additive Manufacturing (AM), Rapid Prototyping, Vat Photopolymerization, Biomedical Engineering, Surgical Planning, Patient-Specific Models, Medical Imaging, 3D Printing, Customized Implants, Digital WorkflowAbstract
Stereolithography (SLA), the pioneering additive manufacturing (AM) technology commercialized in 1986, has evolved from a rapid prototyping tool into a cornerstone of digital medicine. This article examines the technical principles of SLA, detailing its layer-by-layer photopolymerization process. It explores the critical integration of SLA with advanced medical imaging—computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)—to enable a seamless digital workflow from patient data to physical object. The biomedical applications of SLA, including anatomical biomodels, surgical guides, and patient-specific implants, are comprehensively reviewed, highlighting their impact on surgical precision, operative efficiency, and patient outcomes in fields such as maxillofacial surgery, orthopedics, and craniofacial reconstruction. Finally, the article discusses current limitations, including material constraints and cost, and outlines future directions driven by advancements in biocompatible resins and high-speed printing technologies.
References
1. Bagheri, A., & Jin, J. (2019). Photopolymerization in 3D printing. ACS Applied Polymer Materials, 1(4), 593–611.
2. Berman, B. (2012). 3-D printing: The new industrial revolution. Business Horizons, 55(2), 155–162.
3. Gibson, I., Rosen, D., & Stucker, B. (2015). Additive Manufacturing Technologies: 3D Printing, Rapid Prototyping, and Direct Digital Manufacturing (2nd ed.). Springer.
4. Hull, C. W. (1986). Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. U.S. Patent No. 4,575,330. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
5. Martelli, N., Serrano, C., van den Brink, H., Pineau, J., Prognon, P., Borget, I., & El Batti, S. (2016). Advantages and disadvantages of 3-dimensional printing in surgery: A systematic review. Surgery, 159(6), 1485–1500.
6. Melchels, F. P. W., Feijen, J., & Grijpma, D. W. (2010). A review on stereolithography and its applications in biomedical engineering. Biomaterials, 31(24), 6121–6130.
7. Mitsouras, D., Liacouras, P., Imanzadeh, A., Giannopoulos, A. A., Cai, T., Kumamaru, K. K., ... & Grant, G. T. (2015). Medical 3D printing for the radiologist. RadioGraphics, 35(7), 1965–1988.
8. Salmi, M., Paloheimo, K. S., Tuomi, J., Ingman, T., & Mäkitie, A. (2013). Accuracy of medical models made by additive manufacturing (rapid manufacturing). *Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, 41*(7), 603–609.
9. Tack, P., Victor, J., Gemmel, P., & Annemans, L. (2016). 3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: A systematic literature review. Biomedical Engineering Online, 15(1), 115.
10. Tumbleston, J. R., Shirvanyants, D., Ermoshkin, N., Janusziewicz, R., Johnson, A. R., Kelly, D., ... & DeSimone, J. M. (2015). Continuous liquid interface production of 3D objects. Science, 347(6228), 1349–1352.
11. Van Noort, R. (2012). The future of dental devices is digital. Dental Materials, 28(1), 3–12.
12. Wong, K. C. (2016). 3D-printed patient-specific applications in orthopedics. Orthopedic Research and Reviews, 8, 57–66.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License permitting all use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
This work is licensed under a 
