ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Exploring the Biological and Chemical Properties of Emerging 3D-Printed Dental Resin Composites Compared to Conventional Light-Cured Materials.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Cytotoxic Effects of Adhesive Systems with Different pH Values on L929 Fibroblast Cells: An In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in additive manufacturing have accelerated the development of 3D-printed dental resin composites. These materials contain a higher proportion of organic matrix and less filler than light-cured representatives, which may affect their behavior in the oral environment. This study aimed to evaluate the biological and chemical properties of 3D-printed dental resin composites before and after artificial aging, and to compare them with the light-cured representative. Specimens from a light-cured composite (Omnichroma-OMCR) and two 3D-printed composites (GT Temp PRINT-GTPR; SprintRay CROWN-SPRY) were subjected to aging treatments: unaged (T0) or thermocycled for 5000 (T1) and 10,000 cycles (T2). Biological evaluation was performed using MTT assay and Live/Dead cell fluorescence microscopy using human gingival fibroblasts, whereas Raman spectroscopy analysed materials' structural changes. Materials exhibited good biocompatibility (>70% cell viability), with OMCR displaying greater variability. OMCR was more susceptible to chemical degradation under thermal stresses than both 3D-printed materials. Tested 3D-printed composites can provide comparable or even superior biological and chemical properties compared to light-cured representative, likely due to optimized resin formulations and post-curing protocols that improve polymer network organization and reduce residual monomer release. These findings support the potential of tested 3D-printed composites for manufacturing dental restorations.
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.