| Literature DB >> 30544584 |
Izabela Barszczewska-Rybarek1, Grzegorz Chladek2.
Abstract
Bioactive dimethacrylate composites filled with silver nanoparticles (AgNP) might be used in medical applications, such as dental restorations and bone cements. The composition of bisphenol A glycerolate dimethacrylate (Bis-GMA) and triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) mixed in a 60/40 wt% ratio was filled from 25 to 5000 ppm of AgNP. An exponential increase in resin viscosity was observed with an increase in AgNP concentration. Curing was performed by way of photopolymerization, room temperature polymerization, and thermal polymerization. The results showed that the polymerization mode determines the degree of conversion (DC), which governs the ultimate mechanical properties of nanocomposites. Thermal polymerization resulted in a higher DC than photo- and room temperature polymerizations. The DC always decreased as AgNP content increased. Flexural strength, flexural modulus, hardness, and impact strength initially increased, as AgNP concentration increased, and then decreased at higher AgNP loadings. This turning point usually occurred when the DC dropped below 65% and moved toward higher AgNP concentrations, according to the following order of polymerization methods: photopolymerization < room temperature polymerization < thermal polymerization. Water sorption (WS) was also determined. Nanocomposites revealed an average decrease of 16% in WS with respect to the neat polymer. AgNP concentration did not significantly affect WS.Entities:
Keywords: dimethacrylate; flexural properties; molecular structure; silver nanocomposite; water sorption
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30544584 PMCID: PMC6320904 DOI: 10.3390/ijms19123937
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Scheme 1The Bis-GMA and TEGDMA chemical structure.
The AgNP concentrations in Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP compositions, AgNP concentrations in AgNP/hexane colloids, and colloid amounts used in nanocomposite manufacturing.
| AgNP Concentration in Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP Compositions (ppm) | AgNP Concentration in hexane Colloid (ppm) | The Amount of AgNP/hexane Colloid (g) |
|---|---|---|
| 25 | 100 | 25.0 |
| 50 | 100 | 50.0 |
| 100 | 100 | 100.0 |
| 150 | 100 | 150.0 |
| 250 | 100 | 250.0 |
| 500 | 100 | 500.0 |
| 1500 | 500 | 300.4 |
| 5000 | 1000 | 502.5 |
Figure 1The relationship between viscosity and AgNP concentration in Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP compositions. All results were statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Figure 2UV/VIS spectra of the pristine Bis-GMA/TEGDMA and its AgNP loaded modifications in the range of: (a) 190–300 nm; (b) 190–900 nm.
The Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP nanocomposite samples studied and their names: Ph (photopolymerization), RT (room temperature polymerization), T (thermal polymerization).
| AgNP Concentration in Nanocomposite (ppm) | Sample Name | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Photopolymerization | Room Temperature Polymerization | Thermal Polymerization | |
| 0 | Ph0 | RT0 | T0 |
| 25 | Ph25 | RT25 | T25 |
| 50 | Ph50 | RT50 | T50 |
| 100 | Ph100 | RT100 | T100 |
| 150 | Ph150 | RT150 | T150 |
| 250 | Ph250 | RT250 | T250 |
| 500 | - | RT500 | T500 |
| 1500 | - | RT1500 | T1500 |
| 5000 | - | - | T5000 |
The polymerization shrinkage and degree of conversion in studied Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP nanocomposites.
| Sample | Polymerization Shrinkage (%) | Degree of Conversion (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Ph0 | 8.37 ± 0.58 1 | 69.8 ± 6.0 31,32 |
| Ph25 | 8.22 ± 0.60 2,6 | 67.2 ± 7.0 33 |
| Ph50 | 8.01 ± 0.70 3,7 | 64.8 ± 4.6 34,35,f |
| Ph100 | 7.41 ± 0.62 4,6 | 60.2 ± 4.2 g |
| Ph150 | 6.95 ± 0.96 5,7,a,b | 54.8 ± 5.6 31,34,h |
| Ph250 | 5.44 ± 0.53 1–5,c,d | 50.2 ± 7.5 32,33,35,i,j |
| RT0 | 8.39 ± 0.60 8,9 | 69.6 ± 5.4 36,39,k |
| RT25 | 8.13 ± 0.70 10 | 68.0 ± 4.9 37,40 |
| RT50 | 7.99 ± 0.62 11 | 66.8 ± 4.7 41,l |
| RT100 | 7.84 ± 0.44 12 | 65.4 ± 7.2 38,42 |
| RT150 | 7.77 ± 0.78 13,a | 61.4 ± 7.2 m |
| RT250 | 7.66 ± 0.73 14,c | 60.2 ± 6.3 j,n |
| RT500 | 7.41 ± 0.62 8,15 | 56.2 ± 7.7 36–38,o |
| RT1500 | 5.34 ± 0,59 9–15,e | 52.0 ± 9.0 39–42,p |
| T0 | 8.50 ± 0.50 16,23 | 78.2 ± 5.5 43,k |
| T25 | 8.37 ± 0.43 17,24 | 78.0 ± 5.7 44 |
| T50 | 8.28 ± 0.57 18,25 | 78.2 ± 5.4 45,f,l |
| T100 | 8.19 ± 0.48 19,26 | 77.4 ± 7.0 46,g |
| T150 | 8.13 ± 0.69 20,27,b | 76.8 ± 7.0 47,h,m |
| T250 | 8.11 ± 0.51 21,28,d | 76.6 ± 7.2 48,i,n |
| T500 | 8.01 ± 0.70 22,29 | 73.8 ± 4.9 49,o |
| T1500 | 7.15 ± 0.74 16–22,30,e | 70.4 ± 7.4 50,p |
| T5000 | 5.01 ± 0.99 23–30 | 43.6 ± 7.8 43–50 |
1–50p < 0.05—statistically significant results within the nanocomposite series. a–p p < 0.05—statistically significant results between nanocomposites, having the same AgNP content, but obtained in different polymerization modes.
The flexural properties of studied Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP nanocomposites.
| Sample | Flexural Strength (MPa) | Flexural Modulus (MPa) |
|---|---|---|
| Ph0 | 88.6 ± 9.1 1,5 | 3819.4 ± 255.8 40 |
| Ph25 | 92.4 ± 11.7 2,6,a | 3848.5 ± 210.5 41,45 |
| Ph50 | 98.3 ± 11.7 3,7,b | 4039.2 ± 361.9 42,46 |
| Ph100 | 97.4 ± 8.7 4,8,c | 3897.2 ± 314.3 43,47 |
| Ph150 | 74.4 ± 7.7 1–4,9,d,f | 3179.6 ± 343.6 44,45–47,p |
| Ph250 | 57.6 ± 6.8 5–9,e,g | 1808.2 ± 254.9 40–44,q,r |
| RT0 | 79.8 ± 10.2 10,h | 3610.5 ± 316.0 48,54 |
| RT25 | 88.2 ± 9.8 11,16,i | 3665.6 ± 248.6 49,55 |
| RT50 | 95.5 ± 9.0 12,17,j | 3822.3 ± 292.7 50,56,61 |
| RT100 | 98.5 ± 10.4 13,18,k | 4001.6 ± 442.3 51,57,62 |
| RT150 | 96.7 ± 10.8 10,14,19,a,f,l | 3746.8 ± 290.3 52,58 |
| RT250 | 89.6 ± 5.9 15, 20,c,g,m | 3336.5 ± 307.4 53,59,61,62,q,s |
| RT500 | 73.1 ± 7.8 11–15,n | 2676.8 ± 227.8 47–53,60,t |
| RT1500 | 68.1 ± 7.1 16–20,o | 1905.9 ± 289.8 54–60,u |
| T0 | 100.3 ± 6.8 21,25,h | 3872.5 ± 297.9 |
| T25 | 109.0 ± 11.0 26,27,33,a,i | 4034.0 ± 437.6 |
| T50 | 112.0 ± 12.5 28,34,b,j | 4066.4 ± 415.0 |
| T100 | 120.16 ± 8.4 21,29,35,c,k | 4044.4 ± 272.6 61 |
| T150 | 124.8 ± 6.3 22,30,36,d,l | 4066.5 ± 407.3 p |
| T250 | 129.3 ± 15.8 23,26,31,37,e,m | 4153.5 ± 303.4 62,r,s |
| T500 | 129.2 ± 11.2 24,32,38,n | 4210.6 ± 396.6 63,t |
| T1500 | 96.6 ± 7.2 27–32,39,o | 4596.1 ± 590.6 64,u |
| T5000 | 58.7 ± 6.0 25,33–39 | 3368.9 ± 479.4 61–64 |
1–64p < 0.05—statistically significant results within the nanocomposite series. a–u p < 0.05—statistically significant results between nanocomposites, having the same AgNP content, but obtained in different polymerization modes.
Hardness and impact resistance of studied Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP nanocomposites.
| Sample | Hardness (N/mm2) | Impact Resistance (kJ/m2) |
|---|---|---|
| Ph0 | 115.1 ± 9.5 1 | 4.57 ± 0.35 26,30 |
| Ph25 | 117.9 ± 6.1 2 | 4.77 ± 0.36 27,31 |
| Ph50 | 123.3 ± 16.4 3,6 | 4.82 ± 0.47 28,32 |
| Ph100 | 122.8 ± 10.6 4,7 | 4.21 ± 0.45 29,33,g |
| Ph150 | 100.9 ± 12.1 5,6,7,a,b | 3.41 ± 0.35 26–29,34,h |
| Ph250 | 81.4 ± 7.3 1–5,c,d | 2.48 ± 0.31 30–34,i,j |
| RT0 | 110.2 ± 7.6 8,9 | 4.07 ± 0.37 35,40,k |
| RT25 | 117.7 ± 4.2 10 | 4.24 ± 0.44 36,41,l |
| RT50 | 121.3 ± 6.5 11 | 4.25 ± 0.42 37,42,m |
| RT100 | 128.5 ± 13.1 12 | 4.27 ± 0.49 38,43,n |
| RT150 | 130.2 ± 15.1 8,13,16,a | 4.03 ± 0.44 39,44,o |
| RT250 | 122.7 ± 14.5 14,c | 3.67 ± 0.36 45,j,p |
| RT500 | 113.1 ± 11.6 15,16,e | 3.34 ± 0.28 35–39,46,q |
| RT1500 | 83.94 ± 6.7 9–15,f | 2.26 ± 0.15 40–46,r |
| T0 | 121.8 ± 11.6 17,19,22 | 5.20 ± 0.28 47,50,56,k |
| T25 | 126.4 ± 12.1 18,20,23 | 5.38 ± 0.51 51,57,l |
| T50 | 130.5 ± 15.5 21,24 | 5.47 ± 0.56 48,52,58,m |
| T100 | 139.2 ± 18.3 | 5.54 ± 0.44 49,53,59,64,f,n |
| T150 | 143.2 ± 21.7 b | 5.30 ± 0.45 54,60,h,o |
| T250 | 142.8 ± 20.8 25,d | 4.73 ± 0.45 55,61,64,i,p |
| T500 | 148.5 ± 13.0 17,18,e | 4.42 ± 0.50 47–49,62,q |
| T1500 | 149.1 ± 7.1 19–21,f | 4.06 ± 0.41 50–55,63,r |
| T5000 | 158.9 ± 13.5 22–25 | 2.26 ± 0.15 56–63 |
1–64p < 0.05—statistically significant results within the nanocomposite series. a–r p < 0.05—statistically significant results between nanocomposites, having the same AgNP content, but obtained in different polymerization modes.
Figure 3Water sorption of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA/AgNP nanocomposites. The statistically significant results were obtained between pristine polymers and nanocomposites in each series (p < 0.05).
Figure 4The comparison of mechanical properties with the degree of conversion: (a) modulus; (b) flexural strength; (c) hardness; (d) impact resistance. Bar charts correspond to mechanical properties, whereas line charts correspond to the DC.