ArticlePharmaceutics2023
Three-Dimensional-Printed Oral Films Based on LCD: Influence Factors of the Film Printability and Received Qualities.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Protein Delivery Using Three-Dimensional Printing of Buccal Films: Technological Advances and Clinical Potential.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- In vitro and ex vivo models of the oral mucosa as platforms for the validation of novel drug delivery systems.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As an oral mucosal drug delivery system, oral films have been of wide concern in recent years because of their advantages such as rapid absorption, being easy to swallow and avoiding the first-pass effect common for mucoadhesive oral films. However, the currently utilized manufacturing approaches including solvent casting have many limitations, such as solvent residue and difficulties in drying, and are not suitable for personalized customization. To solve these problems, the present study utilizes liquid crystal display (LCD), a photopolymerization-based 3D printing technique, to fabricate mucoadhesive films for oral mucosal drug delivery. The designed printing formulation includes PEGDA as the printing resin, TPO as the photoinitiator, tartrazine as the photoabsorber, PEG 300 as the additive and HPMC as the bioadhesive material. The influence of printing formulation and printing parameters on the printing formability of the oral films were elucidated in depth, and the results suggested that PEG 300 in the formulation not only provided the necessary flexibility of the printed oral films, but also improved drug release rate due to its role as pore former in the produced films. The presence of HPMC could greatly improve the adhesiveness of the 3D-printed oral films, but excessive HPMC increased the viscosity of the printing resin solution, which could strongly hinder the photo-crosslinking reaction and reduce printability. Based on the optimized printing formulation and printing parameters, the bilayer oral films containing a backing layer and an adhesive layer were successfully printed with stable dimensions, adequate mechanical properties, strong adhesion ability, desirable drug release and efficient in vivo therapeutic efficacy. All these results indicated that an LCD-based 3D printing technique is a promising alternative to precisely fabricate oral films for personalized medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.