ArticleToxics2023
Cytotoxicity and Characterization of Ultrafine Particles from Desktop Three-Dimensional Printers with Multiple Filaments.
Article in Toxics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Monitoring and risk assessment of airborne graphene oxide released during a pilot study of 3D printing with polylactic acid filaments.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2026Article
- Advancing chemical mixture toxicity assessment using advanced in vitro NAMs: current status and future perspectives.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Pioneering Soundscapes: Investigating Commercial Fused Deposition Modelling Filament's Potential for Ultrasound Technology in Bone Tissue Scaffolds.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Lung cell toxicological effects of 3D printer aerosolized filament byproducts.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025Article
- 3D printer emissions elicit filament-specific and dose-dependent metabolic and genotoxic effects in human airway epithelial cells.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research has indicated that ultrafine particles (UFPs, particles less than 100 nm) emitted from desktop three-dimensional (3D) printers exhibit cytotoxicity. However, only a limited number of particles from different filaments and their combinations have been tested for cytotoxicity. This study quantified the emissions of UFPs from a commercially available filament extrusion desktop 3D printer using three different filaments, including acrylonitrile butadiene Styrene (ABS), thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), and polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG). In this study, controlled experiments were conducted where the particles emitted were used to expose cells grown in an air-liquid interface (ALI) system. The ALI exposures were utilized for in vitro characterization of particle mixtures, including UFPs from a 3D printer. Additionally, a lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) assay was used to evaluate the cytotoxic effects of these UFPs. A549 cells were exposed at the ALI to UFPs generated by an operational 3D printer for an average of 45 and 90 min. Twenty-four hours post-exposure, the cells were analyzed for percent cytotoxicity in a 24-well ALI insert (LDH assay). UFP exposure resulted in diminished cell viability, as evidenced by significantly increased LDH levels. The findings demonstrate that ABS has the most significant particle emission. ABS was the only filament that showed a significant difference compared to the high efficiency particulate arrestance (HEPA) following 90 min of exposure (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.