With AMA: Healthcare 2026 on June 4th putting 3D printing in healthcare under the spotlight, voices from across the industry are weighing in on where the technology is heading.
Among the clearest is EOS, the Munich-founded laser powder bed technology company, which is making the case that the orthotics and prosthetics industry has spent long enough treating additive manufacturing as a prototyping tool, and that the barriers to consistent, scalable, economically viable clinical production are more operational than technical.
Get more health insights, register now for our AMA: Healthcare 2026 online conference!
Throughput as a Value Proposition: EOS’s Calculated Push into O&P
EOS has been cultivating its position in the orthotics and prosthetics market over several years, expanding application by application across a diverse range of devices: foot insoles, ankle-foot orthotics, back braces, knee braces, prosthetic feet, and pediatric helmets. Each draws on distinct material profiles and machine configurations, reflecting the complexity of a segment where no single setup fits all use cases.
At the core of the company’s production argument is a hardware portfolio built around throughput. Using foot insoles as a benchmark, the output differential across machine tiers becomes concrete: the entry-level FORMIGA P 110 yields roughly 60 parts per 20-hour build, the mid-range EOS P3 NEXT delivers 282 parts in 27 hours, and the large-frame EOS P 770 pushes that to 777 parts across a 53-hour unattended run, a build that requires no operator presence once started. For facilities running multiple machines, the labor equation shifts considerably, and EOS notes that its OPEX costs do not scale linearly with additional systems, a differentiator it positions against competing powder bed technologies.
Near-term commercial focus has landed on the EOS P3 NEXT, where faster cycle times and improved process economics take precedence over a feature-forward redesign. Software and process continuity across the full EOS platform means qualification documentation carries over as facilities scale between machine sizes, reducing the administrative friction that typically slows adoption in regulated clinical environments. “It’s about making the process run faster and focusing on the economics for our customers,” said Dave Krzeminski, Business Development Manager – Polymers.
Materials Expanding the Clinical Range
EOS’s material portfolio has historically centered on Nylon 12 and Nylon 11 for rigid applications, with bio-compatible and additive-free variants available. TPU 1301 has served as the primary elastomer for soft devices. But a newer set of materials is beginning to extend the range of what’s clinically addressable.
The 950 HD Nylon 12 introduces a non-white powder and is compatible with vapor smoothing for an injection-molded surface finish. Arkema Pebax portfolio adds a rigid-to-soft spectrum of blends, useful for applications where standard Nylon is too stiff but full elastomer performance isn’t required. SLS-printed expandable TPU foams that expand post-print in an autoclave process are also in development, along with a bio-based TPE 410 targeting footwear and under-foot applications.
The material generating the most interest, however, is PK 5000, a polyketone that combines high tensile strength with high elongation. Unlike Nylon, which can become brittle in thin-walled or large-format geometries, PK 5000 returns to shape under high deformation.
Krzeminski pointed to prosthetic sockets as an application area where this property profile is particularly relevant, in combination with EOS print chamber sizes : “With our larger volumes, instead of being forced to print a part in two pieces, our technology can facilitate that in one build.”
Friction Points and the Road to Distributed Production
Powder handling remains the most persistent operational challenge in scaling SLS. Depowdering can become rate-limiting, particularly for soft materials where thermal sensitivity determines how quickly a build can be processed. EOS routes this through a partner ecosystem for downstream finishing, with automated depowdering systems capable of removing the manual step for 80 to 90 percent of parts under the right conditions.
The hub-versus-clinic debate remains unresolved. Krzeminski’s answer is measured: “Some applications will still be centralized hubs,” he said, noting the complexity of positioning hospitals as manufacturing facilities. “It will happen, but it will be slow. For orthotics, the speed advantage of on-site printing may be less compelling than it appears; setup overhead can outweigh lead-time gains depending on volume. Prosthetic sockets are a different case, their fit-critical nature makes point-of-care production a more natural fit.
Looking ahead, Krzeminski frames success for EOS in O&P not around market share but around technology fit. “People will find we are set up really well for precise, scalable production, that’s the key differentiator for us.”
Industrializing Care: Production Economics Are Reshaping O&P Manufacturing
EOS’s throughput-first argument reflects a broader shift gaining traction across the O&P landscape. Customization alone no longer differentiates, the ability to scale it does. As demand grows, driven by aging populations and rising rates of chronic conditions requiring orthopedic intervention, manufacturers face mounting pressure to industrialize workflows without sacrificing personalization.
That logic is playing out directly in the SLS market. For instance, TPM3D launched a new generation SLS system at Formnext 2025 designed as a closed-loop ecosystem with automated calibration and optimized thermal control, explicitly targeting lower barriers to industrial SLS adoption while maintaining precision and reduced total cost of ownership.
At the materials level, 3D Systems introduced advanced thermal control on its SLS 380 alongside an expanded material portfolio, including TPU, carbon fiber, and flame-retardant variants, oriented toward high-yield, consistent production runs rather than one-off outputs.
Scale, economics, and hardware maturity are converging around SLS as the production technology of choice for O&P. The question for manufacturers is no longer whether to industrialize, but how fast.
3D Printing Industry is inviting speakers for its 2026 Additive Manufacturing Applications (AMA) series, covering Energy, Healthcare, Automotive and Mobility, Aerospace, Space and Defense, and Software. Each online event focuses on real production deployments, qualification, and supply chain integration. Practitioners interested in contributing can complete the call for speakers form here.
To stay up to date with the latest 3D printing news, don’t forget to subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter or follow us on LinkedIn.
Explore the full Future of 3D Printing and Executive Survey series from 3D Printing Industry, featuring perspectives from CEOs, engineers, and industry leaders on the industrialization of additive manufacturing, 3D printing industry trends 2026, qualification, supply chains, and additive manufacturing industry analysis.
Register now to learn from healthcare AM leaders and expand your medical 3D printing network.
Featured image shows AMA Healthcare 2026. Image via 3D Printing Industry.
