3D printing is rapidly being adopted by manufacturers to produce orthopaedic implants. There is a risk however of structural defects which may impact mechanical integrity. There are also no established standards to guide the design of bone-facing porous structures, meaning that manufacturers may employ different approaches to this. Characterisation of these variables in final-production implants will help understanding of the impact of these on their clinical performance. We analysed 12 unused, final-production custom-made 3D printed acetabular cups that had been produced by 6 orthopaedic manufacturers. We performed high resolution micro-CT imaging of each cup to characterise the morphometric features of the porous layers: (1) the level of porosity, (2) pore size, (3) thickness of porous struts and (4) the depth of the porous layers. We then examined the internal cup structures to identify the presence of any defects and to characterise: (1) their total number, (2) volume, (3) sphericity, (4) size and (5) location. There was a variability between designs in the level of porosity (34% to 85%), pore size (0.74 to 1.87mm), strut thickness (0.28 to 0.65mm), and porous layer depth (0.57 to 11.51mm). One manufacturer printed different porous structures between the cup body and flanges; another manufacturer printed two differing porous regions within the cup body. 5 cups contained a median (range) of 90 (58–101) defects. The median defect volume was 5.17 (1.05–17.33) mm3. The median defect sphericity and size were 0.47 (0.19–0.65) and 0.64 (0.27–8.82) mm respectively. The defects were predominantly located adjacent to screw holes, within flanges and at the transition between the flange and main cup body; these were between 0.17 and 4.66mm from the cup surfaces. There is a wide variability between manufacturers in the porous titanium structures they 3D print. The size, shape and location of the structural defects identified are such that there may be an increased risk of crack initiation from them, potentially leading to a fracture. Regulators, surgeons, and manufacturers should be aware of this variability in final print quality.
