Bioflex elastomer resins peer reviewed research
A range of biocompatible elastomeric photopolymers — from semi-rigid Shore D60 to ultra-soft Shore A10 — used in peer-reviewed research and a granted patent.
What the studies and the patent report, attributed to their authors, with the grade map and the post-processing that governs behaviour.
Published in Nature Portfolio and MDPI journals · applications from biohybrid actuators and cardiac surgical guides to microneedle tooling and bone-regeneration scaffolds.
The 3Dresyns Bioflex family is a range of biocompatible elastomeric photopolymers for SLA, DLP and LCD printing, spanning from semi-rigid Shore D60 down to ultra-soft Shore A10 — each available in Monomer Free (MF) and Monomer Based (MB) variants.
Beyond their product specifications, individual Bioflex grades have been used in peer-reviewed studies — biohybrid actuators (A10 MB), cardiac-ablation surgical guides (A80 MB) and microneedle molds (D60 MB) — and a granted patent uses Bioflex A50 MF as the base resin of a bone-regeneration scaffold.
This page summarises what those studies and the patent report, links to the originals, and maps the grades. Results are attributed to their authors and applicants and are not first-party performance claims by 3Dresyns; where a study or patent used a composite or modified construct, that is stated explicitly.
Three peer-reviewed studies (2025) each used a different Bioflex grade, and a granted patent uses a fourth. The grade map further down covers the whole family; the study and patent results describe the specific grades, formulations and protocols used by each group.
What peer-reviewed research reported
Commercial elastomeric resins evaluated for C2C12 biohybrid actuators
Bioflex A10 MB was included as one of the elastomeric commercial resins in a Nature Portfolio Scientific Data 2025 dataset on materials for C2C12 biohybrid actuators. The study characterised commercial resins for cytotoxicity, mechanical response after sterilisation and printing fidelity using a low-cost LCD printer, and followed the 3Dresyns-recommended post-processing workflow with Cleaning Fluid UNW2 Bio.
The study evaluated commercially available elastomeric photopolymers on a common low-cost LCD printer, under standardised sterilisation by 70% ethanol/UV or autoclaving, providing a comparative dataset for future biohybrid-actuator development.
Post-sterilisation behaviour for cardiac-ablation surgical guides
A 2025 study in Bioengineering (MDPI), from Vrije Universiteit Brussel and UZ Brussel, compared Bioflex A80 MB (3Dresyns) with MED625FLX (Stratasys) as candidate materials for 3D-printed surgical guides in cardiac-ablation surgery, across four disinfection and sterilisation combinations. The authors reported that Bioflex A80 MB remained intact under low-temperature disinfection–sterilisation — manual cleaning combined with vaporised hydrogen peroxide — while high-temperature machine washing or steam autoclaving caused surface cracking; neither material was suitable for cryogenic conditions. Bioflex A80 MB also showed about 17 °C higher first-step thermal stability than the comparator. For this study, A80 MB was optimised for multilayer LCD printing with the 3Dresyns Fine Tuner FT2P.
Reported honestly: the comparator resin (MED625FLX) remained stable across all methods. The Bioflex A80 MB result identifies a validated processing route (low-temperature manual cleaning + vaporised H2O2), not a claim that it outperformed the comparator.
A biocompatible resin for LCD-printed microneedle molds
In a 2025 Pharmaceutics study from the University of Athens, Bioflex D60 MB was used as the biocompatible resin to 3D-print reusable micromolds on a low-cost LCD printer (Phrozen Sonic 4K) — described by the authors as the first reported use of LCD 3D printing for microneedle mold fabrication. Using a Quality-by-Design experimental design, the team identified layer height and exposure time as the critical printing parameters and reached high dimensional accuracy: optimised molds reproduced ~94–99% of the target microneedle height and cavity area, with tip diameters under 50 µm across twelve geometries.
The molds were used to cast PVA microneedles loaded with a model drug; the drug-content and skin-permeation results describe those PVA microneedles, not the Bioflex resin. Bioflex D60 MB is the mold tooling — a reusable manufacturing component.
Evidence at a glance
What each study used and reported
| Research area | Grade & role | Key reported result | Journal | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biohybrid actuators (C2C12) | Bioflex A10 MB — one of six commercial resins (three elastomeric) | Characterised for cytotoxicity, post-sterilisation mechanics and print fidelity on a low-cost LCD printer; the 3Dresyns post-processing workflow with Cleaning Fluid UNW2 Bio was followed | Scientific Data (Nature Portfolio) | 2025 |
| Cardiac-ablation surgical guides | Bioflex A80 MB — compared with MED625FLX (Stratasys) | Reported by the authors as suitable for low-temperature disinfection–sterilisation (manual cleaning + vaporised H2O2); high-temperature machine washing or steam autoclave caused surface cracking; ~17 °C higher first-step thermal stability than the comparator | Bioengineering (MDPI) | 2025 |
| Microneedle molds | Bioflex D60 MB — micromold resin (microneedles cast in PVA) | Reusable LCD-printed micromolds; QbD identified layer height + exposure time as critical; optimised molds reproduced ~94–99% of target microneedle height/cavity area, with tip diameters under 50 µm across twelve geometries | Pharmaceutics (MDPI) | 2025 |
Mobile: scroll horizontally to view all columns; the first column stays visible. The A80 MB result is a process-dependent finding and the comparator resin remained stable across all methods. In the microneedle study, drug and permeation results describe the PVA microneedles, not the resin. The granted patent using Bioflex A50 MF is summarised separately below — it is not a peer-reviewed study.
Granted patent use case (not a peer-reviewed study)
Bioflex A50 MF used as the base resin in a bone-regeneration scaffold patent
Bioflex A50 MF was selected as the elastic, LCD-printable base resin in a granted Indian patent (IN589834, granted 2026; applicant: Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir) for a biodegradable, biocompatible, bilayered periosteum-mimicking scaffold patch for bone defects. In the patent, Bioflex A50 MF (3Dresyns / Resyner Technologies) is named as a commercial material used as a component and is explicitly identified as outside the claimed invention.
This is a patent use case, not a peer-reviewed study. The patented scaffold combines the resin with a nanocement additive and a gelatin coating; reported performance values describe that composite construct, not the neat resin. The invention belongs to its applicant; 3Dresyns supplies the base resin.
Engineering insight
Elasticity and biocompatibility are material–process dependent
Across these studies, the behaviour of a printed elastomeric part is governed by the full material–process chain — printer, curing, washing and sterilisation — not by the resin alone. The Nature Portfolio dataset characterised parts produced with a specific low-cost LCD workflow and the 3Dresyns-recommended post-processing (Cleaning Fluid UNW2 Bio), and the paper itself notes 3Dresyns' guidance that printer light power can affect biocompatibility through uncured monomers. The cardiac-guide study reinforces the point from the other direction: only the low-temperature manual-cleaning plus vaporised-hydrogen-peroxide route kept Bioflex A80 MB intact, while high-temperature steam sterilisation caused surface cracking.
With elastomers, both mechanical behaviour and biocompatibility are properties of the complete material–process workflow — not of the liquid resin alone.
Bioflex hardness ladder
From semi-rigid Shore D60 to ultra-soft Shore A10
Every grade is offered as Monomer Free (MF) and Monomer Based (MB). The "appears in research" column links the grades to the studies and patent summarised on this page. Profiles are relative descriptors within the elastomer range, not datasheet values or measured mechanical properties.
| Bioflex grade | Shore hardness | Available as | Relative profile | Appears in research | Product page |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bioflex D60 | Shore D60 | MF & MB | Semi-rigid (firmest of the range) | Microneedle molds — D60 MB (Pharmaceutics 2025) | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A90 | Shore A90 | MF | Very firm elastomer | — | MF |
| Bioflex A80 | Shore A80 | MF & MB | Firm, flexible | Cardiac surgical guides — A80 MB (Bioengineering 2025) | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A70 | Shore A70 | MF & MB | Medium-firm | — | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A60 | Shore A60 | MF & MB | Medium | — | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A50 | Shore A50 | MF & MB | Soft, pliable | Bone-scaffold base resin — A50 MF (Patent IN589834) | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A20 | Shore A20 | MF & MB | Very soft | — | MF / MB |
| Bioflex A10 | Shore A10 | MF & MB | Ultra-soft (softest of the range) | Biohybrid actuators — A10 MB (Scientific Data 2025) | MF / MB |
Mobile: scroll horizontally to view all columns; the first column stays visible. Shore A and Shore D are different hardness scales; Shore D60 is considerably firmer than Shore A90. Only the grade variants currently listed in the biocompatible collection are shown.
MF vs MB grades
Monomer Free (MF) vs Monomer Based (MB)
Every Bioflex grade is offered in two formulations. 3Dresyns positions Monomer Free (MF) grades as the more biocompatible option, formulated without free monomers to minimise residual extractables after proper post-processing. Monomer Based (MB) grades are positioned for slightly higher mechanical strength and printing resolution. Both belong to the Bioflex family of biocompatible photopolymers.
In the work summarised on this page, the peer-reviewed studies used MB grades (A10 MB, A80 MB, D60 MB), while the granted patent used an MF grade (A50 MF). The choice between MF and MB depends on the balance of biocompatibility margin, mechanical performance and resolution required by the application.
As with any photopolymer, the biocompatibility and mechanical behaviour of a finished part depend on the printer, curing, washing and sterilisation used — see the engineering insight above.
Related products
The grades used in the studies and patent
Each grade is also available in its alternative MF/MB formulation via the hardness ladder above.
Frequently asked questions
Are Bioflex resins finished medical devices?
No. Bioflex resins are supplied as professional manufacturing materials and are not marketed as finished medical devices. The regulatory classification, conformity assessment and validation of any final device made with them remain the sole responsibility of the legal manufacturer, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/745.
Which Bioflex grades appear in published research?
Bioflex A10 MB (biohybrid actuators, Scientific Data / Nature Portfolio 2025), Bioflex A80 MB (cardiac surgical guides, Bioengineering / MDPI 2025) and Bioflex D60 MB (microneedle molds, Pharmaceutics / MDPI 2025). Separately, Bioflex A50 MF was used as the base resin in a granted Indian patent (IN589834) for a bone-regeneration scaffold.
What is the difference between MF and MB?
3Dresyns positions Monomer Free (MF) grades as the more biocompatible option, formulated without free monomers to minimise residual extractables after proper post-processing, and Monomer Based (MB) grades for slightly higher strength and resolution. Both belong to the Bioflex family of biocompatible photopolymers.
Can Bioflex be sterilised?
It depends on the grade and the process. In the 2025 cardiac-guide study, Bioflex A80 MB remained intact under low-temperature manual cleaning combined with vaporised hydrogen peroxide, whereas high-temperature machine washing or steam autoclaving caused surface cracking. Sterilisation suitability must be validated for the specific part and process by the legal manufacturer.
Get Bioflex
Biocompatible elastomeric photopolymers for SLA, DLP and LCD printing, from semi-rigid Shore D60 to ultra-soft Shore A10, each in Monomer Free (MF) and Monomer Based (MB) formulations.
Bioflex resins are supplied as professional manufacturing materials and are not marketed as finished medical devices. The regulatory classification, conformity assessment and validation of any final device manufactured using these materials remain the sole responsibility of the legal manufacturer.
More 3Dresyns evidence
Browse the full catalogue of peer-reviewed publications, market analyses and reviews referencing 3Dresyns materials.