The Impact Of Engineering Innovations In Medicine

Engineering Innovations 1

THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING INNOVATIONS IN MEDICINE

by (Name)

Course

Instructor

University

10 June 2017

Engineering Innovations 2

The Impact of Engineering Innovations in Medicine

This essay discusses the role of engineering innovations in near-term transformations

of the medical field. Engineering is a multi-disciplinary field and cannot be restricted to its

more familiar aspects such as chemical, civil, electrical and mechanical engineering. The

essay explores several other interdisciplinary subjects derived from the extension of

engineering concepts to healthcare applications. These sub-disciplines are micro-technology,

nanotechnology, neuro-engineering, and 3D bio-printing. More specifically, the impact of

novel engineering applications for healthcare purposes is evaluated based on their impact in

the field of medicine over the next five years. Finally, the essay closes with a re-statement of

the developments in engineering that are assessed to transform medicine.

Microtechnology and Nanotechnology

Examples of the evolution in engineering that promise to lead to near-term

improvements in health care outcomes are microtechnology and nanotechnology. While each

of these terms reflects the manipulation of material at miniaturized levels, they have

meaningful differences in definition. For instance, microtechnology refers to the

manipulation of materials at the micrometer scale (Albers, Deigendesch, Turki and Müller,

2010) while Nanotechnology refers to the manipulation of quantum-realm scale, that is, at the

atomic, molecular, and supramolecular level (Arora et al., 2014). Nonetheless,

miniaturization is a firmly mechanical engineering concept that has found use in healthcare

applications (Albers, Deigendesch, Turki and Müller, 2010).

Microtechnology has led to the development of microelectromechanical systems

(MEMS) embedded in medical devices such as blood pressure sensors, stents, and bio-

sensors. Over the next five years, applications of innovations in microtechnology will lead to

development of Bio-MEMS in microneedles, microsurgical tools, microfluidics, medical

implants, and tissue engineering (Kim, Park and Prausnitz, 2012; Chung, Lee,

Engineering Innovations 3

Khademhosseini and Lee, 2012; Volpatti and Yetisen, 2014; Ranamukhaarachchi et al.,

2016). Between 2018 and 2021, the BioMEMS market will grow to a US$6.6 to US$7.6

billion market (Mounier, Troadec, Girardin and Mouly, 2016). In particular, BioMEMS

technology has been incorporated into lab-on-a-chip devices that integrate laboratory

experiments into single chips, substantially lowering the costs of laboratory tests and

improving diagnostic outcomes.

Nanotechnology has been behind the deployment of nanobots for enhanced drug

delivery. Nanorobots for drug delivery are a very particular application of nanotechnology

and, while they may appear far-fetched, are already in use. For instance, research findings

published in 2012 regarding the use of nanorobots in cancer therapy developed rapidly to

human trials in 2015 (Douglas, Bachelet, and Church, 2012; Leukemia Research Foundation,

2014; Amir, Abu-Horowitz and Bachelet, 2015; Wang, 2015). These advancements in

miniaturization promise to increase access to healthcare and reduce errors in diagnosis and

treatment (Owen et al., 2014).

Neural Engineering

Another area where innovations in engineering will improve healthcare over the next

five years is in neural engineering or neuro-engineerings. A dramatically new sub-specialty

within the field of biomedical engineering, neuro-engineering promises radical improvements

in the repair, enhancement, and replacement of neural systems (He et al., 2013; Klein et al.,

2015). This field is concerned with how neural systems can interact with and augment

artificial devices. Engineering principles are essential to modeling synaptic transmission and

in the design of neural code generators (Dubreuil, Amit, and Brunel, 2014; Gallivan and

Culham, 2015). Immediately recognizable examples of solutions utilizing these engineering

concepts include prosthetics responsive to human thought. Other applications include

electrocorticography for safer and non-invasive implants (ECoG) (Lebedev and Nicolelis,

Engineering Innovations 4

2017), neural networks for modeling mental disorders (Markram, 2014), deep-brain

stimulation (DBS) to treat Parkinson’s diseases (Schuepbach et al., 2013), among much

more.

Neuro-prosthetics, however, provide directly demonstrable benefits and deserve

additional commentary. The human nervous system is, on the whole, a system of circuits that

rely on “switches” to transmit neural signals from point to point (Kiernan and Rajakumar,

2013). This biological system is based on genetic proteins at the cellular and molecular

levels. However, the system has mechanics that make it modelable through electrical

engineering principles (Muller et al., 2015). Innovations in modeling these bio-electrical

mechanics have enabled development of far responsive and non-invasive prosthetics for

amputees. Take for instance the DEKA Arm System (Borgia, Latlief, Sasson and Smurr-

Walters, 2014; Resnik, Klinger and Etter, 2014). The prosthetic arm system was the very first

neuro-prosthetic to receive FDA approval in 2014 as part of a larger federal-funded prosthetic

arm program. Hancock et al. (2016) document improved the quality of life and functional

measures for amputees selecting to receive the system. Deployment of this high-performing

and reliable particular arm system relies especially on advances in precision amplifier

technology, which, in turn, rely on electrical engineering principles. Over the next five years,

these cortical prosthetics and other neuro-engineering technologies will restore autonomy to

amputees and patients with neuromuscular injuries (Chan et al., 2012).

3D Bio-printing

Another perhaps, even more, innovation in 3D bio-printing or bimolecular printing.

Once again, perfecting the application of 3D printing at a cellular and molecular level

requires understanding the principles of shape disposition and multi-material micro casting.

Due to the difficulties in achieving successful cellular printing, 3D bio-printing is a very

recent development, with the very first patent for this process was granted in the United

Engineering Innovations 5

States as recently as 2006 (Doyle, 2014; Chia and Wu, 2015). In fact, the inaugural

production platform for 3D printed biomaterial, the NovoGen MMX Bio-printer, was

unveiled in 2009 (Ozbolat and Yu, 2013). Due to this recency, the field also goes by several

other terms including computer-aided tissue engineering and organ printing.

However, the technology holds great promise. The technology has been used to print

tissue models for pharmaceutical testing, organ models as biomedical templates, and implants

for regenerative medicine. Already, several researchers report having successfully printed

human organs such as the human liver, ear cartilage, and miniature renal tissue (Singh,

Ahmed, and Abhilash, 2015; Wang et al., 2016). Applications of these biodegradable tissue

analogs are a decade or so away (Ozbolat and Yu, 2013). Immediate utility of this

technology, however, is realizable in drug testing and screening and as templates for

physiological experiments and cell culture. King, Presnell, and Nguyen (2014) report the

superior performance of a 3D bio printed human breast disease model for the screening of

chemotherapeutic drugs. Kucukgul et al. (2015) demonstrate the utility of 3D bioprinting in

generating a biomimetic cardiovascular disease model. Over the next several years, use of

these physiologically relevant in vivo-like systems will lead to efficient, cheaper, and

accurate drug development.

Conclusion

Engineering is, by definition, an interdisciplinary domain with various extensions in

different fields. The expansion of engineering innovations into health care applications is,

therefore, poised to intensify and deliver greater patient safety and therapy outcomes. This

essay has highlighted the areas where these two disciplines intersect. Also, the essay has

provided an examination of what this intersection means for health care over the next five

years. As already stated, physicians and patients stand to benefit significantly from

engineering innovations. Indeed, these innovations enable doctors to deploy a greater variety

Engineering Innovations 6

of solutions during disease treatment and management. Therefore, physicians that embrace an

inter-disciplinary approach involving health care professionals and engineers stand an even

better chance of achieving better treatment outcomes. In concussion, as the two disciplines

continue to evolve, professionals should be encouraged to foster accelerated information

exchange.

Engineering Innovations 7

References

Albers, A., Deigendesch, T., Turki, T. and Müller, T., 2010. Patterns for design in

microtechnology. Microsystem Technologies, 16(8-9), pp.1537-1545.

Amir, Y., Abu-Horowitz, A. and Bachelet, I., 2015. Folding and Characterization of a Bio-

responsive Robot from DNA Origami. JoVE (Journal of Visualized Experiments),

(106), pp.e51272-e51272.

Arora, S.K., Youtie, J., Carley, S., Porter, A.L. and Shapira, P., 2014. Measuring the

development of a common scientific lexicon in nanotechnology. Journal of

nanoparticle research, 16(1), p.2194.

Borgia, M., Latlief, G., Sasson, N. and Smurr-Walters, L., 2014. Self-reported and

performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm. Journal of rehabilitation research

and development, 51(3), p.351.

Chan, M., Estève, D., Fourniols, J.Y., Escriba, C. and Campo, E., 2012. Smart wearable

systems: Current status and future challenges. Artificial intelligence in

medicine, 56(3), pp.137-156.

Chia, H.N. and Wu, B.M., 2015. Recent advances in 3D printing of biomaterials. Journal of

biological engineering, 9(1), p.4.

Chung, B.G., Lee, K.H., Khademhosseini, A. and Lee, S.H., 2012. Microfluidic fabrication of

microengineered hydrogels and their application in tissue engineering. Lab on a Chip,

12(1), pp.45-59.

Douglas, S.M., Bachelet, I. and Church, G.M., 2012. A logic-gated nanorobot for targeted

transport of molecular payloads. Science, 335(6070), pp.831-834.

Doyle, K., 2014. Bioprinting: from patches to parts. Gen. Eng. Biotechnol. News, 34(10), p.1,

34–5.

Dubreuil, A.M., Amit, Y. and Brunel, N., 2014. Memory capacity of networks with stochastic

Engineering Innovations 8

binary synapses. PLoS Comput Biol, 10(8), p.e1003727.

Gallivan, J.P. and Culham, J.C., 2015. Neural coding within human brain areas involved in

actions. Current opinion in neurobiology, 33, pp.141-149.

Hancock, L., Correia, S., Ahern, D., Barredo, J. and Resnik, L., 2016. Cognitive predictors of

skilled performance with an advanced upper limb multifunction prosthesis: a

preliminary analysis. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, pp.1-8.

He, B., Gao, S., Yuan, H. and Wolpaw, J.R., 2013. Brain–computer interfaces. In Neural

Engineering (pp. 87-151). Springer US.

Kiernan, J. and Rajakumar, R., 2013. Barr's the human nervous system: an anatomical

viewpoint. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Kim, Y.C., Park, J.H. and Prausnitz, M.R., 2012. Microneedles for drug and vaccine delivery.

Advanced drug delivery reviews, 64(14), pp.1547-1568.

King, S.M., Presnell, S.C. and Nguyen, D.G., 2014. Development of 3D bioprinted human

breast cancer for in vitro drug screening. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual

Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego,

CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 2034.

Klein, E., Brown, T., Sample, M., Truitt, A.R. and Goering, S., 2015. Engineering the brain:

ethical issues and the introduction of neural devices. Hastings Center Report, 45(6),

pp.26-35.

Kucukgul, C., Ozler, S.B., Inci, I., Karakas, E., Irmak, S., Gozuacik, D., Taralp, A. and Koc,

B., 2015. 3D bioprinting of biomimetic aortic vascular constructs with self‐supporting

cells. Biotechnology and bioengineering, 112(4), pp.811-821.

Lebedev, M.A. and Nicolelis, M.A., 2017. Brain-Machine Interfaces: From Basic Science to

Neuroprostheses and Neurorehabilitation. Physiological Reviews, 97(2), pp.767-837.

Leukemia Research Foundation, 2014. 2013 – 2014 Scientific Research Grant Recipients:

Engineering Innovations 9

$98,960.00 - Targeted leukemia therapy by logic-guided DNA nanorobots.

[https://trustedpartner.cachefly.net/docs/library/LeukemiaResearchFoundation2013/gr

ant%20recipients%202013-2014%20.pdf. [Accessed: 10 Jun 2017].

Markram, H., 2014. Understanding the brain: Organizational and scientific challenges. From

Physics to Daily Life: Applications in Biology, Medicine, and Healthcare, pp.179-

190.

Mounier, E., Troadec, C., Girardin, G., and Mouly, J., 2016. Status of the MEMS Industry

2016. 13

ed. Yole Développement. https://www.i-

micronews.com/report/product/status-of-the-mems-industry-2016.html [Accessed: 10

Jun 2017]

Muller, R., Le, H.P., Li, W., Ledochowitsch, P., Gambini, S., Bjorninen, T., Koralek, A.,

Carmena, J.M., Maharbiz, M.M., Alon, E. and Rabaey, J.M., 2015. A minimally

invasive 64-channel wireless μECoG implant. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits,

50(1), pp.344-359.

Owen, A., Dufès, C., Moscatelli, D., Mayes, E., Lovell, J.F., Katti, K.V., Sokolov, K.,

Mazza, M., Fontaine, O., Rannard, S. and Stone, V., 2014. The application of

nanotechnology in medicine: treatment and diagnostics. Nanomedicine, 9(9),

pp.1291-1294.

Ozbolat, I.T. and Yu, Y., 2013. Bioprinting toward organ fabrication: challenges and future

trends. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 60(3), pp.691-699.

Ranamukhaarachchi, S.A., Lehnert, S., Ranamukhaarachchi, S.L., Sprenger, L., Schneider,

T., Mansoor, I., Rai, K., Häfeli, U.O. and Stoeber, B., 2016. A micromechanical

comparison of human and porcine skin before and after preservation by freezing for

medical device development. Scientific reports, 6.

Resnik, L., Klinger, S.L. and Etter, K., 2014. The DEKA Arm: Its features, functionality, and

Engineering Innovations 10

evolution during the Veterans Affairs Study to optimize the DEKA Arm. Prosthetics

and orthotics international, 38(6), pp.492-504.

Schuepbach, W.M.M., Rau, J., Knudsen, K., Volkmann, J., Krack, P., Timmermann, L.,

Hälbig, T.D., Hesekamp, H., Navarro, S.M., Meier, N. and Falk, D., 2013.

Neurostimulation for Parkinson's disease with early motor complications. New

England Journal of Medicine, 368(7), pp.610-622.

Singh, O.P., Ahmed, M. and Abhilash, M., 2015. Modern 3D printing technologies: future

trends and developments. Recent Patents on Engineering, 9(2), pp.91-103.

Volpatti, L.R. and Yetisen, A.K., 2014. Commercialization of microfluidic devices. Trends in

biotechnology, 32(7), pp.347-350.

Wang, B., 2015. Pfizer partnering with Ido Bachelet on DNA nanorobots. New Big Future,

Inc. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/pfizer-partnering-with-ido-bachelet-

on.html. [Accessed: 10 Jun 2017].

Wang, L., Xu, M., Zhang, L., Zhou, Q. and Luo, L., 2016. Automated quantitative

assessment of three-dimensional bioprinted hydrogel scaffolds using optical

coherence tomography. Biomedical optics express, 7(3), pp.894-910.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."

The impact of engineering innovations in medicine

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

Ian McGregor

Shannon Williams