Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40211725›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthodontics2025

Comparative microscopic analysis of plastic dispersion from 3D-printed and thermoformed orthodontic aligners.

Piero Antonio Zecca, Marina Borgese, Mario Raspanti, Francesca Zara, Rosamaria Fastuca, Marco Serafin, Alberto Caprioglio

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Piero Antonio ZeccaDepartment of Medicine and Technological Innovation, University of Insubria, Via Guicciardini 9, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Marina BorgeseDepartment of Medicine and Technological Innovation, University of Insubria, Via Guicciardini 9, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Mario RaspantiDepartment of Medicine and Technological Innovation, University of Insubria, Via Guicciardini 9, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Francesca ZaraDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Via della Commenda 10, 20122, Italy.
Rosamaria FastucaPrivate practice, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Marco SerafinDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4680-0989
Alberto CaprioglioDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Via della Commenda 10, 20122, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8264-7320

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare directly printed aligners (DPA) and thermoformed aligners (TFA), evaluating the potential release and dispersion of microplastic (MP) and nanoplastic (NP) particles under simulated oral conditions. MATERIALS AND

methodsDPA samples (Graphy Tera Harz TC-85-DAC resin) and TFA samples (Invisalign® SmartTrack) were subjected to rubs in an ultrapure water bath. The liquid was collected post-friction and analyzed for MPs and NPs using various techniques: optical microscopy (OM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and atomic force microscopy (AFM). Also, plastic residues were quantified by weighing after drying within a laminar flow hood. Microscopic image analyses comprised the quantification of the average size of MPs and NPs, their concentration by TEM, and the roughness analysis by AFM.

resultsThe masses of MPs and NPs separated after rubbing were 0.001 g/200 µl and 0.004 g/200 µl for TFA and DPA samples, respectively. TEM analysis confirmed that DPA samples had larger (203.08 ± 2651.65 μm²) and more numerous particles compared to TFA (0.23 ± 27.53 μm²), even though it was not possible to distinguish the MPs and NPs due to clustering of the plastic residuals. AFM analysis indicated a bigger root mean square grain size for TFA than DPA; similarly, the mean roughness was lesser in the DPA sample than TFA one.

conclusionsDPA generated larger and more numerous plastic particles compared to TFA, though grain-size characterization was challenging due to particle aggregation. This suggests that the manufacturing process and materials used in DPA could impact the creation of MPs and NPs during simulated mastication, highlighting a potential area for process optimization.

Indexed as

Orthodontic Appliance DesignPlasticsPrinting, Three-DimensionalHumansMaterials TestingMicroscopy, Atomic ForceMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionParticle SizeSurface PropertiesPlasticsdirect printed alignersmicroscopy analysismicrosplasticsnanoplasticsthermoformed aligners

Identifiers

PMID40211725
PMCPMC12284233

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.