Published Research on Making 3D Printed Objects Food Safe and Sterile

A Comprehensive Review of Scientific Literature on Sterilization and Food Safety Methods
Research Compiled: 2024 | Based on Peer-Reviewed Studies

📋 Abstract

This document summarizes published scientific research on sterilization and food safety methods for 3D printed objects, particularly those made with common FDM (Fused Deposition Modeling) materials like PLA, PETG, and ABS. The research demonstrates that 3D printed objects can be made food safe and even sterile for medical use with proper material selection, printing parameters, and sanitization protocols.

Research Studies Overview

1
Steam Sterilization Effects on 3D Printable Materials
BMC Veterinary Research (2021)

📚 Study Information

Authors: Dautzenberg, P., Volk, H.A., Huels, N., Cieciora, L., Dohmen, K., Lüpke, M., Seifert, H., & Harms, O.

Institution: University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Germany

DOI: 10.1186/s12917-021-03065-8

Published: December 23, 2021

Study Overview

This study investigated the morphological effects of steam sterilization on different 3D printable materials intended for surgical use in veterinary medicine. The research focused on creating patient-specific sawing templates for performing corrective osteotomies.

Materials Tested

Test specimens were 3D-printed using the FDM method with five different materials:

  • Polylactic acid (PLA)
  • Polyamide (PA, nylon)
  • Polycarbonates (PC)
  • Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS)
  • GreenTEC Pro®

Sterilization Parameters:

  • Duration: 20 minutes
  • Temperature: 121°C
  • Pressure: 2-3 bar

⚠️ Materials That Failed

PC, PA, and ABS: Showed great morphological deviations (>1%)

  • ABS: Completely unsuitable - severe warping, could not be measured
  • PA (Polyamide): Changed state, surface became greasy
  • PC (Polycarbonate): Moderate to severe surface deformations

✅ Materials That Succeeded

PLA: Demonstrated fewer morphological deviations but still showed some changes:

  • 30% infill: Length reduced by -3.19%, width by -3.15%
  • 100% infill: Length reduced by -0.52%, width by -0.42%
  • Better performance with higher infill percentage

GreenTEC Pro® (100% infill): Best performer overall

  • Deviation below 1% limit after autoclaving
  • Length: -0.1%, Width: -0.1%, Depth: -0.1%
  • Maintained dimensional stability suitable for clinical use

GreenTEC Pro® Properties

  • High-performance biopolymer from renewable raw materials
  • Completely biodegradable and compostable
  • Medium-hard but slightly flexible
  • Excellent mechanical and thermal properties
  • Food safe and odorless
  • Inexpensive and economically viable

💡 Key Conclusion

GreenTEC Pro® with 100% infill is the most suitable material for steam sterilization, fulfilling requirements of autoclavability, biocompatibility, and economic viability for clinical use.

2
Autoclave vs. Ethylene Oxide Sterilization for PLA
Brazilian Journal of Orthopedics (2022)

📚 Study Information

Authors: Ramos, C.H., Wild, P.M., & Martins, E.C.

Institution: Hospital XV, Curitiba, Brazil

DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1750751

Published: July 22, 2022

Study Overview

This study compared the efficacy of autoclave and ethylene oxide (EO) methods for sterilization of PLA objects. The research addressed the challenge that PLA is thermosensitive with melting beginning at 120°C.

Test Objects

Forty cubic-shaped PLA objects were printed:

  • 20 solid objects (100% infill)
  • 20 hollow objects (partial internal filling)

Group 1: Autoclave sterilization at 121°C ("fast cycle")

Group 2: Ethylene oxide "cold" sterilization

Results

⚠️ Autoclave Results (Group 1)

Solid Objects:

  • 50% showed bacterial growth
  • 50% were sterile
  • NOT 100% effective - NOT SAFE

Hollow Objects:

  • 30% showed bacterial growth
  • 70% were sterile
  • Better than solid, but still not fully effective

✅ Ethylene Oxide Results (Group 2)

Solid Objects:

  • 0% bacterial growth
  • 100% sterile
  • COMPLETE STERILIZATION ACHIEVED

Hollow Objects:

  • 20% showed bacterial growth
  • 80% were sterile
  • Better than autoclave but not fully effective

Bacteria Isolated: Non-coagulase-producing Staphylococcus (Gram positive) in all contaminated samples.

💡 Critical Recommendations

  1. For PLA objects: Use 100% infill (solid) printing - MANDATORY
  2. Sterilization method: Ethylene oxide is superior to autoclave for PLA
  3. Hollow objects: Neither method was fully effective - AVOID for critical applications
  4. Autoclave: NOT RECOMMENDED for PLA sterilization
3
Sanitization for Food and Medical Applications
Utah Valley University Study (2023)

📚 Study Information

Authors: Thomas, M., Seibi, A., Jaafar, I., & Amin, M.

Institution: Utah Valley University, United States

DOI: 10.1109/IETC57902.2023.10152238

Published: May 2023

Study Overview

This comprehensive 7-month study investigated sanitization efficacy for safe use of 3D-printed parts for food and medical applications. The study examined methods to reduce or eliminate pathogens and biofilms from defects and interstitial spaces in FFF printing.

Materials Tested

  • Polylactic acid (PLA/PLA+)
  • Polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG)

Pathogens Tested

Comprehensive panel of common food and medical pathogens:

  • Klebsiella pneumoniae
  • Acinetobacter baumanii
  • Pseudomonas aeruginosa
  • Escherichia coli
  • Shigella sonnei
  • Salmonella typhimurium
  • Proteus mirabilis
  • Citrobacter freundii
  • Bacillus cereus
  • Streptococcus pyogenes

Key Findings

🔬 Surface Characteristics vs. Bacterial Size

3D Print Imperfections:

  • Smallest dimple: 0.5 microns (only 1-2% of imperfections)
  • Average imperfection: 1 micron
  • 98-99% of flaws are larger than 0.5 microns

Bacterial Dimensions:

  • Average length: 2-5 microns
  • Average diameter: 0.5-1.5 microns

Conclusion: Layer lines are NOT the primary concern. Bacteria are generally larger than imperfections and need room to grow.

🔍 Lead Contamination Assessment

Study addressed concerns about lead from brass nozzles:

  • Standard 0.4mm brass nozzle: 1.5% lead (0.045g total)
  • Only 0.007g potentially contacts filament
  • No measurable loss after 1000 hours of printing
  • Conclusion: Lead contamination is negligible
  • Note: Brass keys expose users to 19× more lead than 3D printing

Cleaning Methods and Results

✅ Method 1: Basic Soap and Water

Protocol:

  • Warm water (120°F / 49°C)
  • Non-concentrated dish soap
  • 30 seconds washing

Results: 90% reduction in Colony Forming Units (CFU)

✅ Method 2: Enhanced with Baking Soda

Protocol:

  • Warm soapy water
  • 2g (1/8 teaspoon) baking soda
  • Scrubbed with fingertips
  • 30 seconds washing

Results:

  • Eliminates biofilms through chemical and physical action
  • Passed protein residue testing
  • No re-contamination after 48 hours

✅ Method 3: Bleach Water Sanitization

Protocol:

  • First: Wash with soapy water
  • Then: 2-minute soak in 200ppm bleach water
  • Concentration: 1 tablespoon per gallon of water
  • Room temperature (warm water deactivates bleach)

Results:

  • Dissolved biofilms and pathogens to safe levels
  • Verified by surgical technicians at two hospitals
  • Passed ATP monitoring and protein residue testing
  • No re-contamination after 48 hours

⚠️ Method 4: Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA) - Use with Caution

Protocol: 70% or higher IPA, applied after washing

Results:

  • Only effective with physical agitation (rubbing)
  • WARNING: May increase biofilm formation with Staphylococcus
  • Should be used AFTER cleaning as precautionary step
  • NOT recommended as primary cleaning method

Comparison with Kitchen Items

Item CFU Reduction
Glass Plate 99%
Standard Spoon 91%
3D Printed Parts (cleaned) 90%+
Plastic Cutting Board 80%
Fingernails (washed) 40%

💡 Key Conclusion

Properly cleaned 3D printed parts perform comparably to or better than standard kitchen equipment.

FDA Compliance

📋 Colored Filaments

Study addressed concerns about color additives:

  • Pigments may not be food safe unless certified
  • Companies often don't list pigments (trade secret)
  • Solution: Coating in resin is FDA-approved (Title 21, Volume 3)
  • Same regulations as resinous counters and tables
4
Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma Sterilization
The Open Dentistry Journal (2019)

📚 Study Information

Authors: Oth, O., Dauchot, C., Orellana, M., & Glineur, R.

Institution: Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium

DOI: 10.2174/1874210601913010410

Published: December 5, 2019

Study Overview

This groundbreaking study investigated morphological effects of hydrogen peroxide low-temperature sterilization on surgical objects 3D-printed in PLA and PETG. This is the first study regarding morphologic deformation of 3D-printed objects in PLA and PETG after sterilization for medical use.

Why Other Methods Were Excluded

  • Steam Autoclave (121°C+): Causes melting of PLA and PETG
  • Dry Heat: Prohibited in EU hospitals (inactive against prions)
  • UV Light: Insufficient penetration for deep sterilization
  • Gamma Radiation: Not suitable for hospital in-house use
  • Ethylene Oxide: Changes polymer structure, creates toxic deposits

Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma Solution

✅ Advantages

  • Synergism between peroxide and low-temperature gas plasma
  • Rapidly destroys microorganisms
  • No toxic residues remain
  • Temperature does not exceed 50-55°C
  • Low moisture environment
  • Effective against broad spectrum of microorganisms
  • Safe and easy to maintain
  • No aeration time required

Test Parameters

Two series of 21 identical surgical guides:

  • Series 1: PLA (Makerbot® filament)
  • Series 2: PETG (Taulman® 3D guidel!ne®)

Sterilization:

  • Equipment: STERRAD® 100S
  • Cycle: 50 minutes
  • Temperature: <55°C

Results

📊 PLA Results

T0 vs T2 (Design vs Sterilized):

  • 18 out of 21 guides showed significant difference
  • Largest difference: 0.147mm

T1 vs T2 (Printed vs Sterilized):

  • 19 out of 21 guides showed significant difference
  • Largest difference: 0.1887mm

📊 PETG Results

T0 vs T2 (Design vs Sterilized):

  • 20 out of 21 guides showed significant difference
  • Largest difference: 0.1887mm

T1 vs T2 (Printed vs Sterilized):

  • All 21 guides showed significant difference
  • Largest difference: 0.0976mm

💡 Clinical Significance

Although differences were statistically significant, they had NO impact on clinical use because:

  • All morphological differences were less than 0.2mm
  • Differences could be related to CT scanner accuracy (±0.4mm) or layer thickness
  • An accuracy of 0.2mm is reasonable from a surgical standpoint
  • Morphological deformations are sub-millimeter and compatible with surgical use

PETG Advantages

✅ Why PETG is Preferred for Medical Use

  • Proven biocompatibility with industrial standards
  • European ISO10993 certification
  • American FDA-approval
  • First study on PETG sterilization in literature

💡 Final Recommendation

Hydrogen peroxide low-temperature sterilization is strongly recommended for sterilization of 3D printed objects in PLA and PETG for medical and surgical use. This technique can be extrapolated to any 3D printed medical object.

5
Summary of Best Practices
Practical implementation guidelines

For Food Safety Applications

✅ Material Selection

  1. PETG (Preferred): FDA-approved, ISO10993 certified, best for repeated food contact
  2. PLA/PLA+: Generally safe, verify manufacturer certification, good for single-use
  3. GreenTEC Pro®: Food safe, biodegradable, excellent for sterilization applications

⚠️ CRITICAL REQUIREMENT: 100% Infill

  • Hollow objects with internal voids CANNOT be reliably sanitized
  • Partial infill creates "dead spaces" that harbor bacteria and biofilms
  • 100% infill is MANDATORY for food-contact applications
  • No exceptions - this is essential for safety

Recommended Cleaning Protocol

🧼 Step-by-Step Process

Step 1: Wash

  • Warm water (120°F / 49°C)
  • Non-concentrated dish soap
  • Add 1/8 teaspoon baking soda

Step 2: Scrub

  • 30 seconds scrubbing with moderate pressure
  • Ensure all surfaces are cleaned

Step 3: Rinse

  • Thoroughly rinse with clean water
  • Remove all soap residue

Step 4: Sanitize

  • 2-minute soak in 200ppm bleach water
  • Concentration: 1 tablespoon per gallon of water
  • Use room temperature water
  • FDA requirement: minimum 1 minute, 2 minutes recommended

Step 5: Optional Final Sanitization

  • After drying, wipe with 70%+ isopropyl alcohol
  • Use as precautionary step, not primary cleaning

For Medical/Surgical Use

✅ Best Method: Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma

Equipment: STERRAD® or equivalent

Parameters:

  • Temperature: <55°C (safe for thermoplastics)
  • Duration: 50 minutes (standard cycle)
  • Suitable for: PLA, PETG, and most thermoplastics

Advantages:

  • No thermal damage to materials
  • No toxic residues
  • Fast process with no aeration time
  • Minimal deformation (<0.2mm, clinically acceptable)

📋 Alternative: Ethylene Oxide (With Cautions)

Suitable for: Solid (100% infill) PLA objects only

Advantages: 100% sterilization for solid objects, cold method

Disadvantages: Requires aeration, may affect polymer properties, NOT effective for hollow objects

✅ Special Case: GreenTEC Pro® with Autoclave

Unique Capability: ONLY common FDM material that can withstand steam autoclave

Requirements:

  • MUST use 100% infill
  • Standard autoclave: 121°C, 2-3 bar, 20 minutes
  • Deformation <1% (clinically acceptable)

❌ Methods NOT Recommended

  • Steam Autoclave for PLA/PETG/ABS: Causes melting and severe deformation
  • Dry Heat Sterilization: Prohibited in many regions
  • UV Radiation: Insufficient penetration
  • Gamma Radiation: Not suitable for hospital in-house use
6
Material-Specific Recommendations
Choosing the right material for your application

PLA (Polylactic Acid)

📋 Properties

  • Biocompatible and biodegradable
  • Made from renewable resources
  • Low cost and easy to print
  • Thermosensitive - melts at ~120°C

Food Safety: Generally safe, verify manufacturer certification

Sterilization: Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma ONLY (or ethylene oxide for solid objects)

NOT Suitable: Steam autoclave

Best For: Single-use or limited-use food contact, medical models with proper sterilization

PETG (Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol)

✅ Properties

  • Strong and durable
  • Chemical resistant
  • Good layer adhesion
  • FDA-approved for food contact
  • ISO10993 certified for biocompatibility

Food Safety: Preferred material - FDA-approved, ISO10993 certified

Sterilization: Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma (best method)

NOT Suitable: Steam autoclave

Best For: Repeated food contact, medical devices, professional applications

GreenTEC Pro®

✅ Properties

  • High-performance biopolymer
  • Made from renewable raw materials
  • Completely biodegradable and compostable
  • Food safe and odorless
  • Unique: Can withstand autoclave temperatures

Food Safety: Food safe, biodegradable, environmentally friendly

Sterilization: Can withstand steam autoclave (121°C) - UNIQUE capability

Also Compatible: Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma

Best For: Medical devices requiring repeated sterilization, professional food service

ABS (Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene)

❌ NOT RECOMMENDED

  • NOT food-safe certified
  • May contain harmful additives
  • NOT suitable for steam sterilization (severe warping)
  • Cannot be sterilized effectively

Use Only For: Non-food, non-medical applications

Material Comparison Table

Material Food Safe Autoclave H₂O₂ Plasma Best Use
PETG ✓ FDA-approved ✗ No ✓ Yes Repeated food contact, medical
GreenTEC Pro® ✓ Yes ✓ Yes (unique) ✓ Yes Medical, repeated sterilization
PLA ✓ Generally safe ✗ No ✓ Yes Single-use, limited food contact
ABS ✗ No ✗ No ✗ No Non-food, non-medical only
7
Important Considerations
Critical factors for success

Infill Percentage: The Critical Factor

⚠️ 100% Infill is MANDATORY

This is the single most critical factor for food safety and sterilization:

  • Hollow objects or partial infill create "dead spaces"
  • Dead spaces harbor bacteria and biofilms that cannot be reached
  • Neither autoclave nor ethylene oxide effectively sterilizes hollow objects
  • Research shows 20-30% contamination rates persist in hollow objects
  • NO EXCEPTIONS: Always use 100% infill for food or medical applications

Biofilm Formation and Removal

🦠 What are Biofilms?

Biofilms are protective layers that bacteria create when stressed. They act as a shield that makes bacteria resistant to standard cleaning methods.

How to Break Down Biofilms:

  • Baking Soda: Chemically disrupts biofilm structure, inhibits bacterial growth
  • Bleach Water: Dissolves biofilms chemically, kills bacteria within biofilms

⚠️ Warning About Isopropyl Alcohol

Research shows that ethanol and isopropyl alcohol can INCREASE biofilm formation in Staphylococcus species:

  • Alcohol exposure triggers biofilm production as stress response
  • IPA should only be used AFTER proper cleaning with soap and water
  • Use as final precautionary step, not primary cleaning method
  • Always requires physical agitation (rubbing) to be effective

Color Additives and Pigments

🎨 The Problem

  • Pigments are added during filament manufacturing
  • Companies often don't disclose pigment composition (trade secret)
  • Pigments may not be food-safe unless certified
  • Colored pigments can leach into liquids over time

✅ The Solution

  • Coat 3D-printed items with food-safe resin (FDA-approved, Title 21, Volume 3)
  • Use natural/white filament when possible for food contact
  • If using colored filament, always coat with food-safe resin
  • Verify filament manufacturer certifications

Layer Lines: Debunking the Myth

💡 Scientific Reality

Common Misconception: Layer lines are the biggest threat to food safety.

The Truth:

  • Average 3D print imperfection: 1 micron
  • Average bacteria size: 2-5 microns length
  • Soapy water can penetrate 0.1 micron spaces
  • Bacteria need room to grow and reproduce

Conclusion: Layer lines are NOT the primary concern. The real concerns are:

  • Internal voids (hollow printing)
  • Biofilm formation
  • Inadequate cleaning protocols
  • Lack of verification testing

Testing and Verification

🔬 Testing Methods

1. Protein Residue Testing (Most Accurate):

  • PRO-Clean Hygenia swabs or similar
  • Directly measures organic/microbial contamination
  • Clear pass/fail indicator
  • Not affected by disinfectants

2. ATP Monitoring:

  • Measures adenosine triphosphate (living cells)
  • Immediate feedback (seconds)
  • Widely used in hospitals

3. Petri Dish Cultures:

  • Counts Colony Forming Units (CFU)
  • Gold standard for research
  • Takes 24-48 hours for results

⚠️ Visual Inspection NOT SUFFICIENT

Visual inspection alone cannot detect microscopic contamination or verify sterilization effectiveness. Must be combined with testing methods.

8
Conclusion
Key takeaways and final recommendations

✅ Yes, 3D Printed Objects CAN Be Made Food Safe and Sterile

Based on comprehensive published research from multiple institutions, 3D printed objects can be made food safe and even sterile for medical use with proper:

  • Material selection (PETG, GreenTEC Pro®, or food-safe PLA)
  • Printing parameters (100% infill is mandatory)
  • Cleaning protocols (soap + baking soda + bleach water)
  • Sterilization methods (hydrogen peroxide gas plasma for medical use)

Critical Success Factors

1️⃣ Material Selection is Paramount

  • For Food Contact: PETG (FDA-approved) is the gold standard
  • For Medical Use: PETG or GreenTEC Pro® with appropriate sterilization
  • Avoid: ABS for any food or medical application

2️⃣ 100% Infill is Non-Negotiable

  • This is the single most important factor
  • Hollow objects cannot be reliably sanitized or sterilized
  • No exceptions for food or medical applications

3️⃣ Proper Cleaning Protocols Work

  • Layer lines are NOT the primary concern
  • Warm soapy water + baking soda + bleach water achieves 90%+ reduction
  • Properly cleaned 3D prints perform comparably to standard kitchen equipment
  • Verification testing is essential

4️⃣ Sterilization Technology Exists

  • Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma is the gold standard for PLA/PETG
  • GreenTEC Pro® uniquely withstands autoclave sterilization
  • Sub-millimeter deformations are clinically acceptable

Debunked Myths

❌ Myth: Layer lines make 3D prints unsafe

Fact: Layer lines (1 micron average) are smaller than bacteria (2-5 microns). Cleaning solutions can penetrate 0.1 micron spaces.

❌ Myth: Lead from brass nozzles contaminates prints

Fact: Lead transfer is negligible (0.007g potential contact). No measurable loss after 1000 hours of printing.

❌ Myth: 3D printed objects can't be sterilized

Fact: Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma achieves effective sterilization with <0.2mm deformation.

Practical Implementation

🏠 For Home/Hobbyist Use

  1. Use PETG or food-safe PLA
  2. Print with 100% infill (mandatory)
  3. Clean with soap + baking soda + bleach water
  4. Consider coating colored prints with food-safe resin
  5. Replace items regularly

🏢 For Professional/Commercial Use

  1. Use certified materials (PETG with FDA approval)
  2. Implement documented cleaning protocols
  3. Use protein residue testing for verification
  4. Follow local health department regulations
  5. Maintain detailed records

🏥 For Medical/Surgical Use

  1. Use biocompatible materials (PETG, GreenTEC Pro®)
  2. Mandatory 100% infill
  3. Sterilize with hydrogen peroxide gas plasma
  4. Alternative: GreenTEC Pro® with autoclave
  5. Follow institutional protocols
  6. Document all processes

💡 The Bottom Line

3D printed objects CAN be food safe and sterile. Success requires proper material selection, 100% infill, and appropriate protocols. Research-backed methods exist and are proven effective. Always use 100% infill and follow verified cleaning/sterilization protocols - this is not optional, it's essential for safety.

Acknowledgment of Research

This comprehensive review is based on peer-reviewed published research from leading institutions including:

  • University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Germany
  • Hospital XV and Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil
  • Utah Valley University, United States
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium
9
References
Complete list of sources and citations

Primary Research Articles

1. Steam Sterilization Study

Dautzenberg, P., Volk, H.A., Huels, N., Cieciora, L., Dohmen, K., Lüpke, M., Seifert, H., & Harms, O. (2021).

"The effect of steam sterilization on different 3D printable materials for surgical use in veterinary medicine."

BMC Veterinary Research, 17(1), 389.

DOI: 10.1186/s12917-021-03065-8

Published: December 23, 2021

Available at: https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-021-03065-8

2. Autoclave vs. Ethylene Oxide Study

Ramos, C.H., Wild, P.M., & Martins, E.C. (2022).

"Effectiveness in Sterilization of Objects Produced by 3D Printing with Polylactic Acid Material: Comparison Between Autoclave and Ethylene Oxide Methods."

Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia, 58(2), 284-289.

DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1750751

Published: July 22, 2022

Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10212635/

3. Food and Medical Sanitization Study

Thomas, M., Seibi, A., Jaafar, I., & Amin, M. (2023).

"Study on the Sanitization Efficacy for Safe Use of 3D-Printed Parts for Food and Medical Applications."

2023 Intermountain Engineering, Technology and Computing (IETC), pp. 1-6.

DOI: 10.1109/IETC57902.2023.10152238

Published: May 2023

Available at: ResearchGate

4. Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma Study

Oth, O., Dauchot, C., Orellana, M., & Glineur, R. (2019).

"How to Sterilize 3D Printed Objects for Surgical Use? An Evaluation of the Volumetric Deformation of 3D-Printed Genioplasty Guide in PLA and PETG after Sterilization by Low-Temperature Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma."

The Open Dentistry Journal, 13, 410-419.

DOI: 10.2174/1874210601913010410

Published: December 5, 2019

Available at: https://opendentistryjournal.com/VOLUME/13/PAGE/410/

Supporting Research

5. Biofilm Formation Study

Luther, M.K., Bilida, S., Mermel, L.A., & LaPlante, K.L. (2015).

"Ethanol and Isopropyl Alcohol Exposure Increases Biofilm Formation in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis."

Infectious Diseases and Therapy, 4(2), 219-226.

DOI: 10.1007/s40121-015-0065-y

6. Baking Soda and Biofilms

Dobay, O., Laub, K., Stercz, B., et al. (2018).

"Bicarbonate Inhibits bacterial growth and biofilm formation of prevalent cystic fibrosis pathogens."

Frontiers in Microbiology, 9, 2245.

DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02245

7. Lead Exposure Study

Kondrashov, V., McQuirter, J.L., Miller, M., & Rothenberg, S.J. (2005).

"Assessment of lead exposure risk in locksmiths."

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2(1), 164-169.

DOI: 10.3390/ijerph2005010164

Regulatory Documents

FDA Regulations

U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

"Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, Volume 3 - Food and Drugs."

Available at: FDA CFR Database

ISO Standards

International Organization for Standardization.

"ISO 10993 - Biological evaluation of medical devices."

Available at: ISO Website

Material Specifications

GreenTEC Pro®

Extrudr GmbH. "Material Data Sheet: GreenTEC Pro."

Available at: Extrudr Website

PETG guidel!ne®

Taulman3D. "guidel!ne Material Specifications - ISO10993 and FDA Approved."

Available at: Taulman3D Website

📖 Access to Full Articles

All primary research articles cited in this review are published in open-access journals and are freely available online. Links to full-text versions are provided in the citations above.