ArticleScientific reports2026
Mechanical properties of thermoformed and direct-printed aligner materials after immersion in 37 °C water: a 14-day in vitro study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ageing effects on chemical, physical, mechanical, and morphological properties of clear aligners - a systematic review.Progress in orthodontics · 2026Pooled it
- Clear Aligners as a Prescribed Source of Unmeasured Intra-Oral Micro- and Nanoplastic Exposure: Release Mechanisms, Human Evidence, Salivary Biomonitoring and the EU Regulatory Context.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Direct-printed aligners in orthodontics: Integrating digital design, materials science, and clinical biomechanics.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2026Review
- Static and Dynamic Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printable Aligner Resins: An In Vitro Study with FTIR Chemical Characterization.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study compared the mechanical properties of direct-printed dental aligner materials made from 3D-printed resins TC-85, TR-07, and TA-28 with those of two conventional thermoformed materials—Zendura-A and Zendura-Flx—to evaluate their performance under simulated physiological conditions. Test specimens were immersed in a 37 °C water bath for 12 different durations: 0, 5, and 30 min; 1, 3, 6, and 9 h; and 1, 3, 7, and 14 d. Tensile tests were performed using a universal testing machine (Zwick Z010, Zwick, Ulm, Germany) to measure the Young’s modulus (MPa), elongation at break (%), and tensile force (N) at strains of 1%, 2%, and 3%. After 14 d of immersion, TC-85, TA-28, and TR-07 exhibited forces in the range of 4.04–7.24 N at 1% strain and 7.30–13.48 N at 3% strain, while Zendura A and Zendura FLX exhibited forces of 26.26–32.91 N at 1% strain and 32.91–65.23 N at 3% strain. The Young’s modulus and UTS results exhibit a trend similar to that of the tensile force. Direct-printed aligners exhibited a 25.3% (TC-85) increase in elongation at break after 30 min, whereas thermoformed aligners exhibited a 5.5% reduction. Direct-printed resins, such as TC-85, TA-28, and TR-07, with temperature-responsive viscoelastic behavior, exhibited statistically significant differences from thermoformed aligner materials, delivering lower mechanical loads that could favor a more suitable orthodontic force profile for clear aligners.
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.