A competition is being held to rethink the Flemish Community Commission’s property portfolio in Brussels (Deadline: 17 June 2025) The competition – organised by the Brussels ‘Bouwmeester’ chief architect – will select a ‘multidisciplinary and transversal’ team to draw up a high-level vision for the commission’s estate which includes 64 buildings and campuses across the Brussels-Capital Region The winner of the €190,000 contract will create short (1–5 years), medium (5–15 years), and long term (15–30 years) strategies for the organisation which provides cultural, educational, well-being and health services to Flemings across the city. According to the brief: ‘The Flemish Community Commission (VGC) holds a significant public real estate portfolio in the Brussels-Capital Region, covering approximately 246,000m², of which around 94,000m² is under its direct management. ‘This property, consisting of 64 buildings and campuses operated under various models and real estate contracts, now requires a clear and structured long-term vision. The VGC aims to move beyond its current multi-year plan and develop a long-term strategy focused on sustainable and resilient infrastructure.’ Brussels is the capital of the French Community of Belgium and home to a Dutch-speaking Flemish community of around 240,000 people. The Flemish Community Commission was founded in 1989 to provide a range of community services to Flemings in Brussels. De Vaartkapoen in Sint-Jans-Molenbeek, Brussels is a venue run by the Flemish Community Commission Credit: Image by Lotte222 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license The competition is the latest to be organised by the Bouwmeester, which has recently launched international contests for an upgrade of the Les Jardins d’Élise school, to retrofit and convert a European Commission office block, and for 25 new affordable homes in the Usquare development of Brussels. The latest project aims to identify a ‘range of sustainable, future-oriented’ solutions for the city’s many Flemish Community Commission buildings and their management. The study will be expected to take into account ‘programmatic, spatial, technical, and financial dimensions.’ Participating teams will be required to have expertise in spatial research including architecture, urban planning, and building services with knowledge of urban development, real estate, and socio-spatial issues. The competition language is Dutch and the winning team will work receive an estimated €190,000 contract. Non-winning teams who submit qualifying bids will each receive a €2,000 honorarium. How to apply Deadline: 11am local time, 17 June Competition funding source: Not supplied Project funding source: Not supplied Owner of site(s): Not suppliedVisit the competition website for more information

TCT 3Sixty, returns to the NEC Birmingham on 4–5 June 2025, bringing together more than 5,000 professionals for two days of live demonstrations, expert talks, and networking. Hosted by The TCT Group, the free-to-attend show is designed to offer a comprehensive look at how additive manufacturing technologies are being applied across the entire product lifecycle—from concept and design to production and post-processing. “There’s no other place in the UK where you’ll find this level of expertise, innovation, and real-world application of additive manufacturing technology under one roof. Whether you’re exploring AM for the first time or looking to optimize existing investments, TCT 3Sixty will deliver real value,” said Duncan Wood, CEO of The TCT Group. TCT 3Sixty ad. Photo via TCT 3Sixty Event Overview and What to Expect Now firmly established as one of the UK’s key industrial gatherings, the event is expected to attract over 5,000 professionals and more than 150 exhibitors, including names such as EOS, Formlabs, Trumpf, Additec, BMF, Carbon, Tri-Tech 3D, and Laser Lines. In addition to product demonstrations, the programme features keynote talks and panel discussions from organisations including the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters, GKN Aerospace, Sartorius, and the Natural History Museum. TCT 3Sixty also provides access to several co-located industry shows—Med-Tech Innovation Expo, Subcon, Automechanika Birmingham, and Smart Manufacturing Week—allowing attendees to explore a wider cross-section of the UK’s advanced manufacturing sector. An event app is available to help visitors plan their schedule, connect with exhibitors, and access AI-powered content recommendations. Matthew Conley, Managing Director at Fullform, shared his experience from a previous edition. “Had an incredible experience at the TCT 3Sixty expo! The new AM tech is nothing short of amazing, achieving some crazy prints in ultra-fast times. Truly exciting to see where additive manufacturing is headed!” Exhibitors at TCT 3Sixty. Photo via TCT 3Sixty. 3D Printing Events and 3DPI on the road 3D printing events are keeping our reporters busy. In May, Belgium’s Flemish Brabant capital hosted the meeting of Materialise 3D Printing in Hospitals Forum 2025, which has become a key gathering for the medical 3D printing community since its launch in 2017. This year, 140 international healthcare professionals convened for two days of talks, workshops, and lively discussion on how Materialise’s software enhances patient care. The Forum’s opening day, hosted at Leuven’s historic Irish College, featured 16 presentations by 18 healthcare clinicians and medical 3D printing experts.  In April, 3DPI headed to Chicago where the global, volunteer-driven organization Additive Manufacturing Users Group (AMUG) also hosted its 37th annual AMUG Conference in Chicago, where six individuals were awarded the DINO (Distinguished Innovator Operator) Award. This recognition highlights their contributions, lasting impact, and support of AMUG and the additive manufacturing community. Honorees included Amy Alexander, Unit Head and Mechanical Development & Applied Computational Engineering at Mayo Clinic; Dan Braley, Senior Technical Fellow at Boeing Global Services; Ryan Kircher, Principal Additive Manufacturing Engineer at rms Company; Dallas Martin, Additive Manufacturing Engineer at Toyota; Patrick Gannon, Director of Production-Additive Manufacturing at Ricoh USA, Inc.; and Brennon White, Technology Specialist – Additive Manufacturing Design and Manufacturing at General Motors. Catch up with our reporting from the AMUG Conference here. Add your event to our free online 3D printing events guide. Take the 3DPI Reader Survey — shape the future of AM reporting in under 5 minutes. Who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news. You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content. Featured image shows Exhibitors at TCT 3Sixty. Photo via TCT 3Sixty. Paloma Duran Paloma Duran holds a BA in International Relations and an MA in Journalism. Specializing in writing, podcasting, and content and event creation, she works across politics, energy, mining, and technology. With a passion for global trends, Paloma is particularly interested in the impact of technology like 3D printing on shaping our future.

Commissioned when material reuse was banned in public projects, a recycling centre in Antwerp by Bovenbouw Architectuur confronts the absurdity of waste ‘Waste is a religious thing,’ says Nick Shay, the main character of Don DeLillo’s novel Underworld from 1997. ‘We entomb contaminated waste with a sense of reverence and dread. It is necessary to respect what we discard.’ Nick is a waste manager. In 1978, he attends a conference in the Mojave Desert. Jesse Detwiler, a ‘waste theorist whose provocations had spooked the industry’, lectures about the scenery of the future, which will be, according to him, a scenery of waste. ‘Basic household waste’, he says, ‘ought to be placed in the cities that produce it. Bring garbage into the open. Let people see it and respect it. Don’t hide your waste facilities. Make an architecture of waste. Design gorgeous buildings to recycle waste and invite people to collect their own garbage and bring it with them to the press rams and conveyors. Get to know your garbage.’ Despite Detwiler’s advice, waste management is rarely the remit of architecture. Incinerators, landfills and recycling centres are usually a matter of infrastructure, of machinery, or of landscapes that have been destroyed by being filled to the brim. In Belgium, this has changed in recent decades; the majority of public commissions – even those relating to waste management – are now a matter of architecture. In 2009, Antwerp‑based practice Bovenbouw Architectuur won a competition organised by the City of Antwerp for the masterplan of its recycling centres, referred to as containerparken. The very first public recycling facility in Belgium opened in 1976, next to the incinerator of the municipality of Izegem, close to the French border. It could boast of three containers: one for glass, one for metal and one for combustible household waste. At this time, garden waste was collected separately and occasionally incinerated together with fuel oil and old tyres; economy and efficiency, rather than environmental considerations, were the main motivations for selective collection. A decade of national protests against the numerous rubbish dumps and the (profitable) import of foreign waste followed. This situation started to change on a national level in 1981, when the Flemish government issued a ‘waste decree’ and established the Openbare Vlaamse Afvalstoffenmaatschappij (Public Flemish Waste Management Institution or OVAM). Since then, foreign waste has continued to be imported, but it is processed instead of dumped. Waste collection at home started to be separated, and in many Flemish cities, five categories were collected weekly or biweekly: plastics, compostable waste, paper, glass and everything else. By means of generous subvention, OVAM also encouraged every municipality to open a recycling centre – with an estimated cost of about €75,000 each. These facilities had a quadruple purpose: to prevent illegal dumping, to promote recycling, to make the population aware of waste, but also to save on energy and raw materials. Construction and demolition waste could be used for local road paving; garden and pruning waste could be composted on site; OVAM took care of all the dangerous waste while contracts with specialised firms, foreign or domestic, were necessary for all the other materials. The first recycling facility in the city of Antwerp opened in 1988; today, almost 40 years later, the city has eight container parks, and five of them have been upgraded by Bovenbouw since they won the open competition in 2009; a facility at Kielsbroek, to the west of the city and next to its main highway junction, opened at the end of 2024. The site is next to a junction of highways in an industrial zone of warehouses, set among mature trees and vegetation. The city, however, is very close: trains whizz by, and new towers of apartments are visible in the distance, as is the river Scheldt, and the petrol‑blue substation by noAarchitecten built in 2009, that supplies a large part of Antwerp with electricity. The entrance of the facility is accompanied by a building for workers, housing a reception, staff room, toilets and changing rooms. The roof is extended to form a large steel canopy supported by a large laminated‑timber beam, under which hazardous waste is stored, such as liquids, batteries or polystyrene. The building’s facades are made out of red bricks, stacked lying on their long edge, so the two holes that puncture each brick are exposed – a kind of ‘improper use’ that draws attention to the specificity and tactility of materials, a tactility shared by everything that passes through the hands of the visitors into the containers. A circular window is cut out from the outer leaves of brickwork at the corner of the building, exposing the inside of the bricks and leaving the edges raw, in a playful but also slightly brutal, DIY way, revealing the different possibilities of banal building materials. The windows offer views of a square, at the project’s centre, intended as a semi‑public meeting place. In reality, visitors are mostly concerned with their waste; an initial part of the project to organise workshops and infosessions – about, for example, composting – has been dropped by the city. Opposite the long building, the square is demarcated by a row of containers and their retaining walls, made out of prefabricated concrete elements, that can be, so the architects argue, disassembled and reused later. An existing height difference in the terrain was preserved: the containers are set into this lower level – accessible only to lorries that come to collect the waste – and visitors are able to drop rubbish into them from the higher square without having to climb a stepladder. Yellow numbers for the containers, hung high on a steel structure with vertical tube lights, indicate what belongs where. The visitor circulation – for cars, although nothing prevents you from arriving by cargo bike – was duplicated to allow for two circuits: one free and one paid‑for (for rubble and combustible waste), accessible via a weighbridge. Once on the square, however, it is easy to switch between the two zones (and, for example, to deliver combustible waste without paying), which is why it was recently decided to send everyone past the weighbridge. The container park does not escape surveillance, and compared with other Belgian cities, everything in Antwerp is strictly regulated. It is, for example, forbidden to take other people’s waste home with you, even if it is still perfectly usable, although the option to put things aside for charity shops is offered. The new Kielsbroek recycling centre was a slow process. In the proposed concept from 2012, the architects explained that they wanted to favour ‘creativity and craftmanship’ over ‘industrial production’. At the same time, they regretted ‘the ban on the reuse of material in a public tender’, which is why they decided to ‘use as much ecological building material as possible,’ (wood insulated with cellulose, for example, or OSB with reduced formaldehyde), ‘without resorting to literal reuse’. Bovenbouw is currently participating in competitions for containerparken elsewhere and, according to founder Dirk Somers, they will pursue ecological standards and approaches more strictly. Thanks to the pioneering work of specialist Belgian design practice Rotor, the legislation in the country has changed: since 2020, the principles of the circular economy are encouraged. The guidelines no longer stipulate the exclusive use of new materials; recycled or reused components have become more accessible and less expensive. For reasons of continuity, however, but also because the client preferred a smooth and efficient process, the starting points of the masterplan from 2012 were preserved. The project replaces an older and smaller facility, a few hundred metres away, from which some elements were reused, such as the storage volumes for chemical materials. Bovenbouw’s material and organisational approach in Kielsbroek – but also at the four other locations – makes it possible to get to know your garbage, as DeLillo’s character phrased it; the contents of the open containers are visible, and although the building’s materials are not recycled or reused, they are conspicuously presented as ‘materials’. It is a space in which to confront that weird and ultimately absurd activity of recycling. Why, after all, bother acquiring something that you have to throw away later anyway? Recycling, in this sense, is what continues to enable production and consumerism. This is how Slavoj Žižek expresses it in his recent book Against Progress: ‘The ecological dream‑notion of total recycling (in which every remainder is used again)’ is ‘the ultimate capitalist dream.’ At the same time, the optimisation of recycling is equally dependent on the industry. Most of the waste in Kielsbroek travels to the port of Antwerp‑Bruges, which also houses the largest chemical cluster in Europe. The private firm Indaver processes approximately five million tons of waste annually, coming from large‑scale factories, public authorities (such as the city of Antwerp), but also from other waste companies, including those from abroad. Indaver has 2,300 collaborators all over Europe, and achieved a turnover in 2023 of €871 million. At the Hooge Maey, some 20km north of Kielsbroek, a 1960s landfill closed in 2018; a new one close by is still in use, while rubbish continues to be destroyed at high temperature in rotary kilns. ‘How’s the waste business?’ someone asks Nick in Underworld. His reply: ‘Booming. The waste business. Bigger by the minute.’ 2025-05-19 Christophe Van Gerrewey Share AR May 2025CircularityBuy Now

The cobbled streets and centuries-old university halls of Leuven recently served as a picturesque backdrop for the Materialise 3D Printing in Hospitals Forum 2025. Belgium’s Flemish Brabant capital hosted the annual meeting, which has become a key gathering for the medical 3D printing community since its launch in 2017. This year, 140 international healthcare professionals convened for two days of talks, workshops, and lively discussion on how Materialise’s software enhances patient care. The Forum’s opening day, hosted at Leuven’s historic Irish College, featured 16 presentations by 18 healthcare clinicians and medical 3D printing experts.  While often described as the future of medicine, personalized healthcare has already become routine in many clinical settings. Speakers emphasized that 3D printing is no longer merely a “cool” innovation, but an essential tool that improves patient outcomes. “Personalized treatment is not just a vision for the future,” said Koen Peters, Executive Vice President Medical at Materialise. “It’s a reality we’re building together every day.” During the forum, practitioners and clinical engineers demonstrated the critical role of Materialise’s software in medical workflows. Presentations highlighted value across a wide range of procedures, from brain tumour removal and organ transplantation to the separation of conjoined twins and maxillofacial implant surgeries. Several use cases demonstrated how 3D technology can reduce surgery times by up to four times, enhance patient recovery, and cut hospital costs by almost £6,000 per case.      140 visitors attended the Materialise 3D Printing in Hospitals Forum 2025. Photo via Materialise. Digital simulation and 3D printing slash operating times  Headquartered a few miles outside Leuven’s medieval center, Materialise is a global leader in medical 3D printing and digital planning. Its Mimics software suite automatically converts CT and MRI scans into detailed 3D models. Clinicians use these tools to prepare for procedures, analyse anatomy, and create patient-specific models that enhance surgical planning. So far, Materialise software has supported more than 500,000 patients and analysed over 6 million medical scans. One case that generated notable interest among the Forum’s attendees was that of Lisa Ferrie and Jiten Parmar from Leeds General Infirmary. The pair worked alongside Asim Sheikh, a Consultant Skullbase and Neurovascular Neurosurgeon, to conduct the UK’s first “coach door osteotomy” on Ruvimbo Kaviya, a 40-year-old nurse from Leeds.  This novel keyhole surgery successfully removed a brain tumor from Kaviya’s cavernous sinus, a hard-to-reach area behind the eyes. Most surgeries of this kind require large incisions and the removal of substantial skull sections, resulting in extended recovery time and the risk of postoperative complications. Such an approach would have presented serious risks for removing Kaviya’s tumor, which “was in a complex area surrounded by a lot of nerves,” explained Parmar, a Consultant in Maxillofacial Surgery.    Instead, the Leeds-based team uses a minimally invasive technique that requires only a 1.5 cm incision near the side of Ravimbo’s eyelid. A small section of skull bone was then shifted sideways and backward, much like a coach door sliding open, to create an access point for tumor removal. Following the procedure, Ravimbo recovered in a matter of days and was left with only a 6 mm scar at the incision point.  Materialise software played a vital role in facilitating this novel procedure. Ferrie is a Biomedical Engineer and 3D Planning Service Lead at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. She used mimics to convert medical scans into digital 3D models of Ravimbo’s skull. This allowed her team to conduct “virtual surgical planning” and practice the procedure in three dimensions, “to see if it’s going to work as we expect.”  Ferrie also fabricated life-sized, polyjet 3D printed anatomical models of Ravimbo’s skull for more hands-on surgical preparation. Sheikh and Parmar used these models in the hospital’s cadaver lab to rehearse the procedure until they were confident of a successful outcome. This 3D printing-enabled approach has since been repeated for additional cases, unlocking a new standard of care for patients with previously inoperable brain tumors.  The impact of 3D planning is striking. Average operating times fell from 8-12 hours to just 2-3 hours, and average patient discharge times dropped from 7-10 days to 2-3 days. These efficiencies translated into cost savings of £1,780 to £5,758 per case, while additional surgical capacity generated an average of £11,226 in income per operating list. Jiten Parmar (right) and Lisa Ferrie (left) presenting at the Materialise 3D Printing in Hospitals Forum 2025. Photo via Materialise. Dr. Davide Curione also discussed the value of virtual planning and 3D printing for surgical procedures. Based at Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital in Rome, the radiologist’s team conducts 3D modeling, visualization, simulation, and 3D printing.  One case involved thoraco-omphalopagus twins joined at the chest and abdomen. Curione’s team 3D printed a multi-color anatomical model of the twins’ anatomy, which he called “the first of its kind for complexity in Italy.” Fabricated in transparent resin, the model offered a detailed view of the twins’ internal anatomy, including the rib cage, lungs, and cardiovascular system. Attention then turned to the liver. The team built a digital reconstruction to simulate the optimal resection planes for the general separation and the hepatic splitting procedure. This was followed by a second multi-colour 3D printed model highlighting the organ’s vascularisation. These resources improved surgical planning, cutting operating time by 30%, and enabled a successful separation, with no major complications reported two years post-operation. Dr. Davide Curione’s workflow for creating a 3D printed model of thoraco-omphalopagus twins using Mimics. Image via Frontiers in Physiology. VR-enabled surgery enhances organ transplants   Materialise’s Mimics software can also be used in extended reality (XR), allowing clinicians to interact more intuitively with 3D anatomical models and medical images. By using off-the-shelf virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) headsets, healthcare professionals can more closely examine complex structures in an immersive environment. Dr. David Sibřina is a Principal Researcher and Developer for the VRLab team at Prague’s Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM). He leads efforts to accelerate the clinical adoption of VR and AR in organ transplantation, surgical planning, and surgical guidance.  The former Forbes 30 Under 30 honouree explained that since 2016, IKEM’s 3D printing lab has focused on producing anatomical models to support liver and kidney donor programmes. His lab also fabricates 3D printed anatomical models of ventricles and aneurysms for clinical use.  However, Sibřina’s team recently became overwhelmed by high demand for physical models, with surgeons requesting additional 3D model processing options. This led Sibřina to create the IKEM VRLab, offering XR capabilities to help surgeons plan and conduct complex transplantation surgeries and resection procedures.      When turning to XR, Sibřina’s lab opted against adopting a ready-made software solution, instead developing its own from scratch. “The problem with some of the commercial solutions is capability and integration,” he explained. “The devices are incredibly difficult and expensive to integrate within medical systems, particularly in public hospitals.” He also pointed to user interface shortcomings and the lack of alignment with established medical protocols.  According to Sibřina, IKEM VRLab’s offering is a versatile and scalable VR system that is simple to use and customizable to different surgical disciplines. He described it as “Zoom for 3D planning,” enabling live virtual collaboration between medical professionals. It leverages joint CT and MRI acquisition models, developed with IKEM’s medical physicists and radiologists. Data from patient scans is converted into interactive digital reconstructions that can be leveraged for analysis and surgical planning.  IKEM VRLab also offers a virtual “Fitting Room,” which allows surgeons to assess whether a donor’s organ size matches the recipient’s body. A digital model is created for every deceased donor and live recipient’s body, enabling surgeons to perform the size allocation assessments.  Sibřina explained that this capability significantly reduces the number of recipients who would otherwise fail to be matched with a suitable donor. For example, 262 deceased liver donors have been processed for Fitting Room size allocations by IKEM VRLab. In 27 instances, the VR Fitting Room prevented potential recipients from being skipped in the waiting list based on standard biometrics, CT axis measurements, and BMI ratios.                          Overall, 941 patient-specific visualizations have been performed using Sibřina’s technology. 285 (28%) were for liver recipients, 311 (31%) for liver donors, and 299 (23%) for liver resection. Living liver donors account for 59 (6%) cases, and split/reduced donors for 21 (2%).           A forum attendee using Materialise’s Mimics software in augmented reality (AR). Photo via Materialise. Personalized healthcare: 3D printing implants and surgical guides  Beyond surgical planning and 3D visualisation, Materialise Mimics software supports the design and production of patient-specific implants and surgical guides. The company conducts healthcare contract manufacturing at its Leuven HQ and medical 3D printing facility in Plymouth, Michigan.  Hospitals can design patient-specific medical devices in-house or collaborate with Materialise’s clinical engineers to develop custom components. Materialise then 3D prints these devices and ships them for clinical use. The Belgian company, headed by CEO Brigitte de Vet-Veithen, produces around 280,000 custom medical instruments each year, with 160,000 destined for the US market. These include personalised titanium cranio-maxillofacial (CMF) implants for facial reconstruction and colour-coded surgical guides. Poole Hospital’s 3D specialists, Sian Campbell and Poppy Taylor-Crawford, shared how their team has adopted Materialise software to support complex CMF surgeries. Since acquiring the platform in 2022, they have developed digital workflows for planning and 3D printing patient-specific implants and surgical guides in 14 cases, particularly for facial reconstruction.  Campbell and Taylor-Crawford begin their workflow by importing patient CT and MRI data into Materialise’s Mimics Enlight CMF software. Automated tools handle initial segmentation, tumour resection planning, and the creation of cutting planes. For more complex cases involving fibula or scapula grafts, the team adapts these workflows to ensure precise alignment and fit of the bone graft within the defect. Next, the surgical plan and anatomical data are transferred to Materialise 3-matic, where the team designs patient-specific resection guides, reconstruction plates, and implants. These designs are refined through close collaboration with surgeons, incorporating feedback to optimise geometry and fit. Virtual fit checks verify guide accuracy, while further analysis ensures compatibility with surgical instruments and operating constraints. Once validated, the guides and implants are 3D printed for surgery. According to Campbell and Taylor-Crawford, these custom devices enable more accurate resections and implant placements. This improves surgical alignment and reduces theatre time by minimising intraoperative adjustments. An example of the cranio-maxillofacial implants and surgical guides 3D printed by Materialise. Photo by 3D Printing Industry Custom 3D printed implants are also fabricated at the Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute in Bologna, Italy. Originally established as a motion analysis lab, the institute has expanded its expertise into surgical planning, biomechanical analysis, and now, personalized 3D printed implant design. Dr. Alberto Leardini, Director of the Movement Analysis Laboratory, described his team’s patient-specific implant workflow. They combine CT and MRI scans to identify bone defects and tumour locations. Clinical engineers then use this data to build digital models and plan resections. They also design cutting guides and custom implants tailored to each patient’s anatomy. These designs are refined in collaboration with surgeons before being outsourced to manufacturing partners for production. Importantly, this workflow internalizes design and planning phases. By hosting engineering and clinical teams together on-site, they aim to streamline decision-making and reduce lead times. Once the digital design is finalised, only the additive manufacturing step is outsourced, ensuring “zero distance” collaboration between teams.  Dr. Leardini emphasised that this approach improves clinical outcomes and promises economic benefits. While custom implants require more imaging and upfront planning, they reduce time in the operating theatre, shorten hospital stays, and minimise patient transfers.  After a full day of presentations inside the Irish College’s eighteenth-century chapel, the consensus was clear. 3D technology is not a niche capability reserved for high-end procedures, but a valuable tool enhancing everyday care for thousands of patients globally. From faster surgeries to cost savings and personalized treatments, hospitals are increasingly embedding 3D technology into routine care. Materialise’s software sits at the heart of this shift, enabling clinicians to deliver safer, smarter, and more efficient healthcare.  Take the 3DPI Reader Survey – shape the future of AM reporting in under 5 minutes. Read all the 3D printing news from RAPID + TCT 2025 Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news.You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content.Featured image shows 3D printed anatomical models at Materialise HQ in Leuven. Photo by 3D Printing Industry.