| Literature DB >> 35466252 |
Pavel Seredin1,2, Dmitry Goloshchapov1, Vladimir Kashkarov1, Yuri Ippolitov3, Jitraporn Vongsvivut4.
Abstract
The application of biomimetic strategies and nanotechnologies (nanodentology) has led to numerous innovations and provided a considerable impetus by creating a new class of modern adhesion restoration materials, including different nanofillers. An analysis of the molecular properties of biomimetic adhesives was performed in this work to find the optimal composition that provides high polymerisation and mechanical hardness. Nanocrystalline carbonate-substituted calcium hydroxyapatite (nano-cHAp) was used as the filler of the light-cured adhesive Bis-GMA (bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate). The characteristics of this substance correspond to the apatite of human enamel and dentin, as well as to the biogenic source of calcium: avian eggshells. The introduction and distribution of nano-cHAp fillers in the adhesive matrix resulted in changes in chemical bonding, which were observed using Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. As a result of the chemical bonding, the Vickers hardness (VH) and the degree of conversion under photopolymerisation of the nano-cHAp/Bis-GMA adhesive increased for the specified concentration of nanofiller. This result could contribute to the application of the developed biomimetic adhesives and the clinical success of restorations.Entities:
Keywords: Vickers hardness; biomimetics; bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate; degree of conversion; nanocrystalline carbonate-substituted hydroxyapatite; nanodentology
Year: 2022 PMID: 35466252 PMCID: PMC9036251 DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics7020035
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomimetics (Basel) ISSN: 2313-7673
Composition of the synthesised biomimetic adhesive samples.
| Sample | Bis-GMA, mL | nano-cHAp, g | Degree of Conversion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | 250 | 0.2 | 33.68 | 0.827 ± 0.012 |
| #2 | 250 | 0.16 | 29.16 | 0.93 ± 0.016 |
| #3 | 250 | 0.12 | 43.56 | 0.80 ± 0.014 |
| #4 | 250 | 0.08 | 87.90 | 0.74 ± 0.015 |
| #5 | 250 | 0.04 | 91.82 | 0.68 ± 0.015 |
| #6 | 250 | 0.01 | 72.60 | 0.654 ± 0.016 |
Figure 1Determination of the microhardness of samples containing different proportions of nano-cHAp and adhesive from the indentation made by the diamond pyramid in the samples. Magnification ×130.
Figure 2Comparison of FTIR spectra of dental biomimetic adhesives containing different amounts of nano-cHAp. (1) Sample #6 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.01 g); (2) sample #6 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.04 g); (3) sample #4 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.08 g); (4) sample #3 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.12 g); (5) sample #2 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.16 g); (6) sample #1 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.01 g).
Figure 3FTIR spectra of the (1) original Bis-GMA adhesive, (2) nanocrystalline carbonate-substituted calcium hydroxyapatite (nano-cHAp) and (3) sample #1 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.2 g).
Molecular vibrations in the FTIR spectra of biomimetic adhesives.
| Wavenumber (cm−1) | Assignment | Compound | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1750–1665 | C=O stretch, | Bis-GMA* | [ |
| 1637 | Aliphatic C=C | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1610 | Aromatic C=C | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1528, 1510 | Aromatic C=C | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1451 | C–H bending, υ3 CO32− in HAp lattice | Bis-GMA, nano-cHAp* | [ |
| 1414 | υ3 CO32− in HAp lattice | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 1403, 1380 | C–H bending | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1320, 1295 | C–O stretch doublet | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1243 | Aromatic C–O | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1150 | C–O–C stretch | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1120 | C–O–C stretch | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 1090 | υ3 PO43− | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 1081 | C–OH stretch | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 962 | υ1 PO43− (stretching mode of the P–O bond) | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 960, 945 | C-H | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 878, 870 | CO32− in HAP lattice | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 815 | C–C–O stretch | Bis-GMA | [ |
| 630 | δ OH | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 602, 597 | υ4 PO43− O–P–O bending modes | nano-cHAp | [ |
| 562.560 | nano-cHAp | [ |
Bis-GMA*—bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate; nano-cHAp*—nanocrystalline carbonate-substituted calcium hydroxyapatite; HAp lattice—hydroxyapatite crystal lattice.
Figure 4Spectral features of biomimetic adhesives. (1) Sample #6 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.01 g); (2) sample #6 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.04 g); (3) sample #4 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.08 g); (4) sample #3 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.12 g); (5) sample #2 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.16 g); (6) sample #1 Bis-GMA/nano-cHAp (0.01 g).
Figure 5Comparison of the dependence of microhardness, H (VH), and degree of conversion of biomimetic adhesives on nanofiller admixture.