ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Cytotoxicity assessment of LuxCreo and Nylon direct-printed photopolymers for orthodontic applications: An in vitro study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the cytotoxicity of two direct-printed photopolymers, LuxCreo and Nylon, intended for orthodontic applications.
methodsLuxCreo (LuxCreo Inc., Chicago, IL) and Nylon (EOS, Munich, Germany) direct-printed materials were compared to conventionally used orthodontic materials including polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA). Human gingival fibroblasts (hGFB) were cultured in 12-well plates on sterilized material discs for 24-h, 72-h or 7-day intervals (n = 3). Following co-incubation of hGFB with the materials, an MTT assay was conducted to evaluate cell viability, an LDH assay was used to evaluate cell death, and ELISA was used to measure IL-6, IL-8, and IL-1β production.
resultsNylon significantly reduced cell metabolic activity at 24 h, 72 h, and 7 days, while LuxCreo showed a reduction only at 72 h and 7 days, compared to conventional materials. None of the materials induced a significant increase in cell death in hGFB. Elevated levels of IL-6 and IL-8 were observed only in the Nylon group. IL-1β levels were not significantly different between groups.
conclusionDirect-printed materials reduced cell viability. While none of the materials induced cell death, Nylon did increase the pro-inflammatory cytokine response. Future studies should investigate the underlying mechanisms of cytotoxicity and pro-inflammatory responses to improve the safety and biocompatibility of orthodontic materials. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The elevated pro-inflammatory cytokine response observed with direct-printed photopolymers highlight the need for clinical studies to investigate the mechanisms underlying cytotoxic and inflammatory responses. Future research should also evaluate the effects of long-term intraoral exposure and monitor relevant biomarkers during orthodontic treatment to better assess the safety and biocompatibility of these materials.
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.