ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2024
Analysis of Gingival Fibroblasts Behaviour in the Presence of 3D-Printed versus Milled Methacrylate-Based Dental Resins-Do We Have a Winner?
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Post-Processing Time's Influence on Biocompatibility of 3D-Printed Denture Base Resins.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- A Pilot Study for "In Vitro" Testing the Surface Conditioning Effects on CAD/CAM Hybrid Nanoceramic Adhesion.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- In Vitro Study Regarding Cytotoxic and Inflammatory Response of Gingival Fibroblasts to a 3D-Printed Resin for Denture Bases.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Biocompatibility of CAD/CAM Milled Dental Restorative Materials: A Systematic Review from In Vitro Studies.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Biomaterials Based on Bee Products and Their Effectiveness in Soft Tissue Regeneration.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) techniques are based on either subtractive (milling prefabricated blocks) or additive (3D printing) methods, and both are used for obtaining dentistry materials. Our in vitro study aimed to investigate the behavior of human gingival fibroblasts exposed to methacrylate (MA)-based CAD/CAM milled samples in comparison with that of MA-based 3D-printed samples to better elucidate the mechanisms of cell adaptability and survival. The proliferation of human gingival fibroblasts was measured after 2 and 24 h of incubation in the presence of these samples using a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay, and the membrane integrity was assessed through the lactate dehydrogenase release. The level of reactive oxygen species, expression of autophagy-related protein LC3B-I, and detection of GSH and caspase 3/7 were evaluated by fluorescence staining. The MMP-2 levels were measured using a Milliplex MAP kit. The incubation with MA-based 3D-printed samples significantly reduced the viability, by 16% and 28% from control after 2 and 24 h, respectively. There was a 25% and 55% decrease in the GSH level from control after 24 h of incubation with the CAD/CAM milled and 3D-printed samples, respectively. In addition, higher levels of LC3B-I and MMP-2 were obtained after 24 h of incubation with the MA-based 3D samples compared to the CAD/CAM milled ones. Therefore, our results outline that the MA-CAD/CAM milled samples displayed good biocompatibility during 24-h exposure, while MA-3D resins are proper for short-term utilization (less than 24 h).
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.