ArticleBMC oral health2026
Evaluation of the cytotoxicity of flowable composite resins with different compositions: in vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cytotoxic Effects of Flowable Composite Resins with Different Resin Matrix Compositions on L929 Fibroblasts.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2026Article
- Cytotoxicity of hexagonal boron nitride incorporated conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cements: in vitro study.BMC oral health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFlowable composite resins are widely used in dentistry, and their biocompatibility is a critical factor. This study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of flowable composite resins with different compositions using an MTT assay on L929 mouse fibroblast cultures. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, four types of flowable composite resins with different compositions were used: nanoparticle-containing (Filtek Supreme - FS), self-adhesive (Vertise Flow - VF), highly filled (G-aenial Universal Injectable - GUI), and fibre-reinforced (EverX Flow - EF) resins. A total of 28 disc samples (seven from each material), each with a diameter of 5 mm and a thickness of 2 mm, were prepared and polymerized. Five different dilutions (1:1, 1:2, 1:4, 1:8, and 1:16) of the test materials were added to the L929 mouse fibroblast culture medium. The effects of the test materials on cell viability were evaluated using the MTT assay at three different time points (24, 48, and 72 h). The optical densities of the cells were measured with a spectrophotometer. The calculated viability percentages (%) were statistically analysed along with their standard deviations. The effects of the materials' dose and incubation time on cell viability were evaluated using two-way ANOVA. A Bonferroni post hoc test was applied to determine which factor or interaction group the difference originated from (p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant).
resultsFS, GUI, and EF materials showed no cytotoxic effects at any of the tested concentrations and incubation times; cell viability was found to be above 70% under all conditions. In contrast, undiluted VF material showed cytotoxic effects at all time points, while the 1/2 concentration exhibited cytotoxicity at 72 h.
conclusionFS, GUI, and EF materials are considired to be biocompatible based on ISO 10993-5 criteria, However, the dose- and time-dependent cytotoxicity observed for the VF material limits its biocompatibility. This may be attributed to differences in monomer and filler composition, highlighting the importance of evaluating the biocompatibility of flowable composite resins before clinical use.
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.