ArticleInternational dental journal2026
Clinical Implications of Sterilization Methods Applied to 3D-Printed Implant Surgical Guides: An In Vitro Study.
Article in International dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
aimsThis in vitro study evaluated how 3 sterilization methods-autoclaving, ethylene oxide (EO) gas, and hydrogen peroxide gas plasma-affect the mechanical, physical, and dimensional properties of 3-dimensional (3D) printed implant surgical guides. These techniques are widely used in dental practice but differ in mechanism and limitations.
methodsTwenty specimens were fabricated using a digital light processing printer and divided into 4 groups (n = 5): non-sterilized control, autoclaving (121 °C, 15 minutes), EO gas (55 °C, 60 minutes), and hydrogen peroxide gas plasma (<57 °C, 18 minutes). Mechanical tests evaluated flexural strength, modulus, and Shore D hardness while translucency and dimensional stability were also assessed. Shape deviation and implant positioning accuracy were compared before and after sterilization. Data were analyzed with one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc test.
resultsAll sterilized groups maintained internal fit deviations within clinically acceptable tolerance (±120 μm), showing no significant differences in overall dimensional accuracy. Implant placement precision was preserved, with implant-tooth distances ≥2 mm. EO sterilization significantly increased the flexural strength (122.49 ± 10.10 MPa) and modulus (3477 ± 161 MPa) compared with controls whereas autoclaving showed the lowest strength (92.40 ± 15.06 MPa). Shore D hardness exceeded 90 HS in all groups, with autoclaving producing the highest values. Only EO treatment significantly reduced translucency.
conclusionSterilization method influenced the mechanical and optical properties of 3D-printed surgical guides without compromising dimensional accuracy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians to select sterilization protocols that preserve the functionality of 3D-printed surgical guides and ensure precision in implant placement.
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.