See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/299523119

Characterization of an experimental resin composite organic matrix based on

a tri-functional methacrylate monomer

Article  in  Dental Materials Journal · March 2016

DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2014-307

CITATIONS READS

14 308

6 authors, including:

Eduardo Moreira da Silva Jaime Dutra Noronha-Filho

Universidade Federal Fluminense Universidade Federal Fluminense
116 PUBLICATIONS   1,598 CITATIONS    9 PUBLICATIONS   69 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Cristiane Mariote Amaral Laiza Tatiana Poskus

Universidade Federal Fluminense Universidade Federal Fluminense
49 PUBLICATIONS   902 CITATIONS    39 PUBLICATIONS   815 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Dental Biomaterials Science - Research & Teaching View project

The influence of flaxseed (Linum usitatissimum) intake on Wistar rats body composition and bone quality View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Eduardo Moreira da Silva on 03 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Dental Materials Journal 2016; 35(2): 159–165

Characterization of an experimental resin composite organic matrix based on a

tri-functional methacrylate monomer
Eduardo Moreira da SILVA, Luciana MIRAGAYA, Jaime Dutra NORONHA-FILHO, Cristiane Mariote AMARAL,
Laiza Tatiana POSKUS and José Guilherme Antunes GUIMARÃES

Analitical Laboratory of Restorative Biomaterials —LABiom-R, School of Dentistry, Federal Fluminense University, Niterói, Brazil, Rua Mário Santos
Braga, nº 30-Centro, Niterói, RJ, 24020-140, Brazil
Corresponding author, Eduardo Moreira da SILVA; E-mail: emsilva@vm.uff.br

This study evaluated the potential of a tri-functional monomer (trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate —TMPTMA) for inclusion in a
dental composite organic matrix. Initially, four ternary matrixes with different concentrations (wt%) of bi-functional monomers [Bis-
GMA (G), Bis-EMA (E) and TEGDMA (T)] were analyzed: GET523, GET532, EGT523 and EGT532 (the numbers (n) represent n×10
wt% of each monomer). The following properties were evaluated: degree of conversion, flexural strength, elastic modulus, hardness,
absorption, solubility, diffusion coefficient of water and crosslink density. Based on the best overall results obtained for EGT532,
all properties were re-evaluated in a matrix where TEGDMA (T) was replaced by a tri-functional monomer, TMPTMA (A)-EGA532.
EGA532 presented the best results for flexural strength, hardness, absorption and crosslink density. EGT523, EGT532 and EGA532
presented the lowest diffusion coefficients of water. The overall results indicated that TMPTMA could be useful in formulating
organic matrixes suitable for dental restorative composites.

Keywords: Resin composite, Organic matrix, TMPTMA, Chemical-mechanical properties

thereby increasing the filler incorporation and degree of

INTRODUCTION
Since the development of the resin composites by Rafael
BOWEN in the late 1950s, many efforts have been
made to improve the behavior of this class of restorative
materials1-3). In general, resin composites comprise three
phases: a organic matrix formed by a mix of bi-functional
methacrylate monomers, inorganic filler particles
and a silane-coupling agent that chemically bonds
the organic matrix to the filler particles. These three
phases strongly influence the materials’ properties4,5).
Irrespective of recent and important developments1,2),
organic matrixes of resin composites are still composed
of bi-functional methacrylate momomers6). 2,2-Bis[4-
(2-hydroxy-3-methacrylyloxypropoxy)phenyl] propane
(Bis-GMA), the most used methacrylate monomer, is a
high molecular weight molecule that has two aromatic
rings and two -OH groups in its backbone. On one
hand, these characteristics improve properties such
as fracture toughness and elastic modulus7). However,
these -OH groups may also establish inter- and intra-
molecular hydrogen bonding that strongly increases
Bis-GMA viscosity5,8). This high viscosity negatively
interferes with the degree of conversion9) and decreases
the loading of high amounts of filler particles into the
organic matrix. Moreover, these polar groups also
increase the hydrophilicity of the Bis-GMA molecule,
thereby increasing its water absorption. To overcome
these shortcomings, low molecular weight monomers,
such as triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA),
are incorporated to reduce the organic matrix viscosity,
Color figures can be viewed in the online issue, which is avail-
able at J-STAGE.
Received Nov 7, 2014: Accepted May 19, 2015
doi:10.4012/dmj.2014-307 JOI JST.JSTAGE/dmj/2014-307
conversion of the resin composite5).
Other high molecular weight monomers were
developed in an attempt to improve specific properties
of commercially available resin composites10). Non-
hydroxylated monomers, such as ethoxylated bisphenol
A glycol dimethacrylate (Bis-EMA), are used to reduce
the water absorption through the organic matrixes11).
Moreover, the absence of -OH also makes this monomer
less viscous than Bis-GMA.
The polymerization of resin composites involves
a free radical reaction by breaking aliphatic C=C
bonds and establishing C-C covalent bonds between
monomers, oligomers and adjacent polymer chains.
Theoretically, a greater degree of C=C bond conversion
will produce greater crosslinking in the rigid polymeric
matrix network. However, the literature shows that,
even reaching a high degree of conversion, the polymeric
network may present areas with different concentrations
of remaining C=C bonds12). This structural heterogeneity
can lead to the reduction of crosslink density, increasing
the plasticization of the polymeric network and
jeopardizing the chemical-mechanical properties of the
resin composite13). In this field, some previous studies
have shown that TEGDMA undergoes more primary
cyclization reactions rather than effective crosslinking
among polymeric chains14). This primary cyclization may
create areas of microgel formation, also increasing the
polymer network heterogeneity.
Trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate (TMPTMA) is
a low viscosity, tri-functional monomer that is able to
act as a crosslinking agent in polymeric matrixes. This
monomer was first used as isofiller, i.e., pre-polymerized
160 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165

filler, to improve wear resistance in experimental
microfilled composites15) and in experimental dental
resins16). More recently, Ghasaban et al.17) showed that
acting as a crosslinking agent, TMPTMA improved
the dynamic mechanical properties of cyanoacrylate
adhesives suitable for bone fracture fixation. Although
these studies showed promising results for this
monomer, there is still a lack of information about
the use of TMPTMA for improving the chemical-
mechanical properties of organic matrixes suitable for
producing resin composites. Therefore, the purpose of
the present investigation was to evaluate the effect of
replacing TEGDMA with the tri-functional monomer,
TMPTMA, on the chemical-mechanical properties of an
experimental resin composite organic matrix. The
established hypothesis was that the replacement of
TEGDMA by TMPTMA would improve the chemical-
mechanical properties of the experimental resin
composite organic matrix.
resolution of 4 cm−1. Afterwards, the increments were
light-activated and the spectra were recorded exactly as
performed for the unpolymerized increments. The DC%
was calculated from the ratio between the integrated
area of ababsorption bands of the aliphatic C=C bond
(1,638 cm−1) to the aromatic C=C bond (1,608 cm−1)
obtained from the polymerized and unpolymerized
increments, using the following equation:
DC%=100×[1−(Rpolymerized/Runpolymerized)],
(1)
where R=area at 1,638 cm−1/area at 1,608 cm−1
Flexural strength and elastic modulus
Bar-shaped specimens (n=10) were built up by filling
a steel split mold (10×2×1 mm) positioned over a
polyester strip. After filling the mold to excess, the
material surface was covered with a polyester strip and
a glass slide and compressed with a device (500 g) for

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials
The monomers Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, TEGDMA and
TMPTMA (Fig. 1) were used as received (Essthec,
Essington, PA, USA). Initially, four ternary matrixes
based on TEGDMA were analyzed (Table 1). Afterwards,
a new matrix was produced, replacing TEGDMA
with TMPTMA in the formulation that presented the
best overall results in the first phase. In each matrix,
0.6 wt% of camphoroquinone and of 1.2 wt% of ethyl
N,N-dimethyl-4-aminobenzoate (EDMAB) (Aldrich
Chemical, Milwaukee, WI, USA) were introduced as
photosensitizers. The matrices were produced using a
dual centrifuge (SpeedMixer, Flaktek, Germany) with
three stages of 1 min at 1,500 rpm. All specimens in
this study were light-activated with a quartz-tungsten-
halogen unit (Optilux 501, Kerr, Danbury, CT, USA),
using an irradiance of 650 mW/cm2 for 30 s.

Degree of monomer conversion (DC%)

Increments of each matrix were inserted in a teflon
mold (0.785 mm3) that was positioned on an ATR
crystal of an FT-IR spectrometer (Alpha-P/Platinum
ATR Module, Bruker Optik, Ettlingen, Germany). The
spectra between 1,600 and 1,700 cm−1 were recorded
by the spectrometer operating with 40 scans and at a Fig. 1 Monomers used in this current study.

Table 1 Polymeric matrixes composition (monomers concentration-wt%)

Matrixes Bis-GMA (G) Bis-EMA (E) TEGDMA (T) TMPTMA (A)

GET523 50 20 30 0

GET532 50 30 20 0

EGT523 20 50 30 0

EGT532 30 50 20 0

EGA532 30 50 0 20
 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165
20 s to avoid porosities. The specimens were then light
activated from the top by two overlapping footprints.
After 24 h of dry storage at 37ºC, the specimens were
submitted to a three-point bending test in a universal
testing machine, with an 8 mm span between the
supports, at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and
a 50 N load cell (DL 10000, Emic, Curitiba, Paraná,
Brazil). The elastic modulus (EM) was calculated from
the linear portion of the load/deflection curve and the
flexural strength (FS) from the load at fracture, using
the following standard equations:
l3F
EM= (MPa) (2)
4wh3d
3lF
FS= (GPa), (3)
2wh2
where l is the support span length (mm), F is the load
(N) at fracture, w is the specimen width (mm), h is the
specimen height and d is the deflection (mm) at load F.
Knoop hardness number (KHN)
Disc-shaped specimens (n=5) were built up by filling a
Teflon split mold measuring 3 mm in diameter and 2 mm
in height. The mold was covered with a polyester strip
and a glass slide and the organic matrixes were light
activated. After 24 h of dry storage at 37ºC, the light-
irradiated surfaces of the specimens were wet ground
in a polishing machine (DPU-10, Struers, Copenhagen,
Denmark), using 1200 and 4000 grit SiC paper. Five
Knoop indentations (50 g/15 s), spaced 500 µm apart,
were made on the irradiated surfaces of each specimen
(Micromet 5104, Buehler, Lake Bluff, IL, USA).
Crosslink density (CLD)
The crosslink density was estimated by evaluating the
softening effect of 75% ethanol, according to the method
described by da Silva et al.12). Briefly, disc-shaped
specimens were built up by filling a Teflon split mold
measuring 3 mm in diameter and 2 mm in height (n=5).
After 24 h dry storage at 37°C, the irradiated surfaces
were wet polished with 1200 and 4000 grit SiC paper.
Afterwards, five Knoop indentations (50 g/15 s), spaced
of 500 µm apart, were made on the polished surfaces of
each specimen (Micromet 5104, Buehler). The specimens
were then stored in 75% ethanol for 24 h and the Knoop
hardness was reevaluated. The crosslink density (CLD)
was estimated by using the difference between the mean
values of Knoop diamond indentation depth (dk-μm)
after and before ethanol storage:
CLD=dk final −dkinitial, (4)
where a smaller difference indicates a higher CLD. Mt /M∞ ≤0.6), the above equation is reduced to:
Absorption, solubility and diffusion coefficient of water
Disc-shaped specimens were built up by filling an
aluminum mold (6 mm in diameter and 1 mm in
thickness). After filling the mold to excess, the surface
161
was covered with a polyester strip and a glass slide,
compressed with a device (500 g) for 20 s and light
activated (n=5). The discs were placed in a desiccator
containing freshly dried silica gel, and transferred
to an oven at 37ºC. After every 24 h period, the discs
were weighed (AUW 220, Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan)
until a constant mass (m1) was attained, i.e., disc mass
variation was less than ±0.01 mg in any 24 h period. The
thickness and the diameter of the discs were measured
using a digital caliper (MPI/E-101, Mitutoyo, Tokyo,
Japan), and the volume (V ) was calculated in mm3.
The discs were then individually placed in plastic vials
and immersed in 20 mL of distilled water at 37±1ºC.
Subsequently, the discs were removed from the vials at
fixed time intervals, blotted dry with absorbent paper,
weighed and returned to the same vials with 20 mL of
distilled water. On the first day the discs were weighed
at time intervals of 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and
180 min. After the first day, the discs were weighed
daily until absorption equilibrium was reached [mass
variation less than ±0.01 mg (m2)]. The discs were then
placed in a desiccator containing freshly dried silica gel,
transferred to an oven at 37ºC and weighed daily until
the mass variation was less than ±0.01 mg (m3). The
absorption (Sp) and the solubility (Sl) were calculated
using the following formulae (µg/mm3):
m2−m3
Sp= (5)
V
m1−m3
Sl= (6)
V
Diffusion coefficient of water (D)
For a solid bounded by two parallel planes, the Fick’s
second law relates the diffusion coefficient of water
in one dimension (x) as a function of the time, and its
solution is expressed as follows:
∂C ∂2C
=D 2 (7)
∂t ∂x
Here, D is the diffusion coefficient of water and C is the
concentration (%) of the diffusing specimen at time t.
For longer times of diffusion, the solution to this
differential equation is expressed as follows:
Mt 8 ∞ 1 (2n+1)2π2
=1− 2 Σ exp[− Dt] (8)
M∞ π n=0 (2n+1)2 L2
Where Mt is the mass uptake (g) at time t, M ∞ is the
mass uptake (g) at equilibrium, and L is the specimen
thickness (m).
However, for the initial stages of uptake (when
Mt 4 Dt 21
reduced to: = ( ) (9)
M∞ L π
The diffusion coefficient of water D (10−13.m2.s−1)
162 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165

was obtained from the initial curve slope of the plot of
Mt /M ∞ against t1/2.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using Statgraphics
Centurion XVI software (Statpoint Technologies,
VA, USA). The data for each variable was separately
analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)
and Tukey’s HSD post hoc test. All analyses were
performed at a significance level of α=0.05.
Table 3 shows the results for Sp, Sl, D and CLD.
With regard to absorption, the result was as follow: EGA
532<EGT532<EGT523<GET532<GET523, (p<0.05). The
solubility values recorded for GET532, EGT523, EGT532
and EGA532 were not statistically different from each
other (p>0.05). The highest D was presented by GET532
followed by GET523 (p<0.05). EGA532, EGT523 and

RESULTS
The means and standard deviations for DC%, FS, FM
and KHN are presented in Table 2. No significant
difference was found for the DC% (p>0.05). On the
other hand, ANOVA revealed statistically significant
differences for FS, EM and KHN. The highest FS was
presented by EGA532 (p<0.05), followed by EGT532,
EGT523 and GET532, without differences among
them (p>0.05). The EM recorded for GET523, GET532,
EGT532 and EGA532 were not statistically different
(p>0.05). The lowest EM was presented by EGT523
(p<0.05), although this was not significantly different
from GET523, GET532 and EGT532. The highest KHN
was presented by EGA532 (p<0.05). The GET523,
GET532, EGT523 and EGT532 matrixes presented the Fig. 2 Plots of Mt /M∞ against the t1/2 for all polymeric
lowest and statistically similar KHN values (p>0.05). matrixes.

Table 2 Means (Standard Deviations) for degree of conversion, flexural strength, elastic modulus and Knoop hardness
number

Degree of conversion Flexural strength Elastic modulus Knoop hardness number

Matrices
(%) (MPa) (GPa) (HK)

GET523 58.8 (1.9)a 87.8 (5.2)a 2.0 (0.1)a,b 13.0 (1.0)a

GET532 55.8 (4.6)a 77.8 (2.9)b 1.8 (0.1)a,b 12.9 (0.8)a

EGT523 60.8 (3.2)a 78.2 (3.0)b 1.7 (0.2)a 13.4 (0.4)a

EGT532 58.2 (4.3)a 79 (2.0)b 1.8 (0.2)a,b 13.5 (0.3)a

EGA532 61.9 (2.3)a 102.8 (5.8)c 2.0 (0.1)b 15.8 (0.5)b

* For each property, means followed by different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).

Table 3 Means (Standard Deviations) for water absorption, solubility, diffusion coefficient and crosslink density

Water absorption Solubility Diffusion coefficient Crosslink density

Matrixes
(µg/mm3) (µg/mm3) (10−13×m2/s) (µm)

GET523 39.3 (1.2)a 10.6 (0.4)a 7.5 (0.4)a 2.9 (0.2)b

GET532 33.7 (1.6)b 9.9 (1.7)a,b 8.7 (0.4)b 2.5 (0.1)a

EGT523 28.8 (0.9)c 9.2 (0.5)a,b 6.0 (0.2)c 2.3 (0.1)a,c

EGT532 20.1 (1.1)d 8.7 (0.5)b 5.6 (0.4)c 2.1 (0.1)c

EGA532 17.6 (0.6)e 8.9 (0.6)b 5.5 (0.5)c 1.7 (0.3)d

* For each property, means followed by different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).
 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165
EGT532 presented similar and lower D (p>0.05). The
best CLD was presented by EGA532 (p<0.05), followed
by EGT532 and EGT523 with no statistically significant
differences and by GET532 and GET523.
The plots of Mt /M∞ against the t1/2 for all organic
matrixes are shown in Fig. 2.
DISCUSSION
In the first phase of the present study, four ternary
matrixes were synthetized using bi-functional
dimethacrylate monomers commonly used in
commercially available resin composites, so that the
concentration of TEGDMA in two of them was 20 or
30 wt%. The concentrations of Bis-GMA and Bis-EMA
were also maintained constant in two matrices (50 wt%)
and ranged in others (20 or 30 wt%). The rationale for
this was to analyze the effect of each monomer on the
chemical-mechanical behavior of the organic matrixes.
In a second phase, all properties were re-evaluated in
a new matrix produced by replacing TEGDMA with
TMPTMA (EGA532) in the matrix that presented the
best overall behavior in the first phase (EGT532).
During the polymerization, organic matrixes of
resin composites forms a tri-dimensional polymer
network that strongly influences the chemical-
mechanical properties of the material. The first aspect
that dictates this network formation is the degree of
conversion18), which is influenced by aspects such as
monomer structure (bi- or poly-functionality), molecular
weight and presence of polar (hydrogen-bonding) sites
on monomer backbones19). In the present study, no
differences were found in DC% among the matrixes
(Table 2). Since the presence of stiff aromatic rings and
-OH pendant groups negatively affects the degree of
conversion of Bis-GMA molecules20), it was a surprising
that the matrixes with 50 wt% of Bis-GMA (GET523 and
GET532) did not present a lower DC%. Thus, it is most
probable that the more flexible ether linkages and the
high C=C bonds unit to volume ratio of Bis-EMA and
TEGDMA have overpassed the negative effect of Bis-
GMA on DC%20). In light of the former statements, it
is reasonable to assume that the chemical-mechanical
properties of the matrixes analyzed here were influenced
more by the structure of the monomers and less by the
degree of conversion achieved after polymerization.
On the other hand, the CLD was found to be
significant (Table 3). This property plays a crucial role on
the chemical-mechanical behavior of resin composites
because it improves the packing density, reduces the
free volume and decreases the polymer plasticization
of the composite polymeric matrix12). These features
may increase the values of flexural strength and elastic
modulus21), while decreasing the ability of solvents to
dissolve into the polymeric network, thereby increasing
its degradation resistance22). EGA532 presented the best
CLD (lower variation in Knoop indentation depths).
This result was probably influenced by the highest C=C
bonds unit to volume ratio and by the low viscosity of
the TMPTMA9,23). During the polymerization reaction
163
of methacrylate matrixes with initial low viscosity, the
onset of limiting the diffusion and auto-acceleration
are delayed14). Moreover, due to the greater statistical
likelihood of crosslink formation21), it is possible that,
even during auto-deceleration (where the polymeric
matrix reaches a high viscosity and consequently
a reduction in mobility), the physical structure of
the TMPTMA monomer (Fig. 1) could favor the
establishment of crosslinking between close chains.
The synergism between these phenomena could have
contributed to the highest CLD obtained with the
EGA532 organic matrix. The increasing in TEGDMA
content from 20 to 30 wt% negatively affected the
CLD (Table 3). This can be explained by the great
tendency of TEGDMA to form primary cycles during the
polymerization reaction.
In a clinical view, the flexural strength of a resin
composite should be high enough to support the stresses
derived from mastication, while its elastic modulus
should be as close as possible to that of the surrounding
tissues, i.e., enamel and dentin, in order to avoid or
diminish the stress transfer to the tooth-composite
interface. In the present study, the EGA532 matrix
presented the highest flexural strength (Table 2). This
can be explained by its better crosslink density. On the
other hand, its elastic modulus did not differ from those
of GET523, GE532 and EGT532 (Table 2). Since highly
crosslinked polymeric matrixes are brittle in nature,
thereby presenting a high elastic modulus, this result
was somewhat surprising. The findings of Viljanen et
al.23) could explain this result. These authors showed
that irrespective of the larger number of reactive C=C
bonds, a dendrimer/methylmethacrylate copolymer
presented low elastic modulus, and claimed that the
plasticizing effect of pendant side chains influenced
this result. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that even
presenting the highest CLD, the branched pendant
chains of TMPTMA acted as a plasticizer, thereby
avoiding an increase in the elastic modulus of EGA532.
The fact that GET523 and GET532 did not present
a higher elastic modulus was also surprising because all
the matrixes presented a similar degree of conversion
(Table 2). Due to the presence of two -OH groups,
Bis-GMA is more highly prone to establish strong
intermolecular interactions that decrease the flexibility
of the polymer9). Theoretically, this should increase
the elastic modulus. One reasonable explanation for
this behavior could be based on a synergistic effect of
primary cyclization of TEGDMA and the low cohesive
energy of hydrogen bonding given by the -O- groups
from Bis-EMA, which could have overshadowed the role
of Bis-GMA on the elastic modulus of these matrixes.
In dentistry, many studies have tried to correlate
the hardness with the wear of resin composites24-26).
However, due to the great diameter of the indenter used
(Knoop diamond), it is possible that these studies were
not able to distinguish between the hardness of the
polymeric matrixes to that of inorganic fillers, thereby
recording a great variability in the results that
could have impaired obtaining a correlation between
164 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165
composite hardness and wear. Differently, in the
present study the hardness was measured exclusively in
polymeric matrixes. Thus, the current results indicate
a contribution of this phase to the overall hardness of a
resin composite.
The hardness of EGA532 was the highest among
the matrixes. This result is supported by the work of
Kawai et al.16) Those authors proved that experimental
binary methacrylate matrixes composed of TMPTMA/
TEGDMA were harder than others formed by Bis-
GMA, UDMA and TEGDMA. Moreover, they also found
a negative correlation between hardness and wear of
matrixes. According to those authors, their findings
were due to the 3-D polymer network produced by
TMPTMA. Thus, it is most probable that in the present
study the highly crosslinked structure of EGA532
positively influenced its hardness.
The values of absorption in the present study
clearly show the role monomers play in this chemical
property (Table 3). The two matrixes with 50 wt% of
Bis-GMA (GET523 and GET532) presented higher
absorption than those with 50 wt% of Bis-EMA
(EGT523 and EGT532). These findings are supported
by previous studies and highlight the influence of polar,
hydrophilic -OH groups on absorption. Sideridou et al.11)
showed that poly-Bis-GMA presented higher water
absorption than did poly-Bis-EMA and claimed that
this was due to the higher cohesive energy density for
hydrogen bonding of -OH (2,980 J/cm3) when compared
to the -O- group present in Bis-EMA (881 J/cm3).
Additionally, when analyzing three resin composites,
Örtengren et al.27) showed that the absorption of
composites with Bis-GMA and TEGDMA in their
matrixes was comparatively higher than a composite
with Bis-EMA, i.e. an ethoxylated bisphenol A glycol
dimethacrylate without hydrophilic -OH groups. The
absorption recorded for EGA532 was the lowest. It is
safe to assume that this behavior was influenced by
the better CLD achieved with this matrix. Another
important aspect in this current study was the higher
D (the rate at which the water penetrated the polymer
network) presented by the matrixes with a high content
of Bis-GMA (Table 3/Fig. 2).
Different from absorption, the current results
did not show a remarkable influence of monomers on
solubility (Table 3). Most probably, this behavior was
influenced by the similarity in DC% among matrixes
(Table 2). In fact, previous studies have already
shown that solubility correlates well with degree of
conversion4, 28).
CONCLUSION
The EGA523 matrix presented better behavior
regarding flexural strength, hardness, absorption
and crosslink density. Moreover, this matrix behaved
similarly to the other matrices for the remaining
analyzed properties. Thus, the formulated hypothesis
that the replacement of TEGDMA by TMPTMA would
improve the chemical-mechanical properties of the
experimental organic matrix was accepted. It was
concluded that the tri-functional monomer TMPTMA
has the potential to formulate organic matrixes to
produce dental composites. Future studies analyzing
new organic matrixes with different concentrations of
TMPTMA must be performed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was supported by FAPERJ (Grant
E-26/101.465/2010) and CNPq (Grant 474921/2009-3).
The authors thank ESSTHEC for donating all the
monomers.
REFERENCES
1) Cramer NB, Couch CL, Schreck KM, Carioscia JA, Boulden
JE, Stansbury JW, Bowman CN. Investigation of thiol-ene
and thiol-ene-methacrylate based resins as dental restorative
materials. Dent Mater 2010; 26: 21-28.
2) Hsu SH, Chen RS, Chang YL, Chen MH, Cheng KC, Su WF.
Biphenyl liquid crystalline epoxy resin as a low-shrinkage
resin-based dental restorative nanocomposite. Acta Biomater
2012; 8: 4151-4161.
3) Mankovskaia A, Levesque CM, Prakki A. Catechin-
incorporated dental copolymers inhibit growth of Streptococcus
mutans. J Appl Oral Sci 2013; 21: 203-207.
4) Goncalves L, Filho JD, Guimaraes JG, Poskus LT, Silva
EM. Solubility, salivary sorption and degree of conversion of
dimethacrylate-based polymeric matrixes. J Biomed Mater
Res B Appl Biomater 2008; 85: 320-325.
5) Ellakwa A, Cho N, Lee IB. The effect of resin matrix
composition on the polymerization shrinkage and rheological
properties of experimental dental composites. Dent Mater
2007; 23: 1229-1235.
6) Peutzfeldt A. Resin composite in dentistry: the monomer
systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997; 105: 97-116.
7) Ferracane JL, Greener EH. The effect of resin formulation on
the degree of conversion and mechanical properties of dental
restorative resins. J Biomed Mater Res 1986; 20: 121-131.
8) Charton C, Falk V, Marchal P, Pla F, Colon P. Influence of Tg,
viscosity and chemical structure of monomers on shrinkage
stress in light-cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins.
Dent Mater 2007; 23: 1447-1459.
9) Sideridou I, Tserki V, Papanastasiou G. Effect of
chemical structure on degree of conversion in light-cured
dimethacrylate-based dental resins. Biomaterials 2002; 23:
1819-1829.
10) Moszner N, Salz U. New developments of polymeric dental
composites. Prog Polym Sci 2001; 26: 535-576.
11) Sideridou I, Tserki V, Papanastasiou G. Study of water
sorption, solubility and modulus of elasticity of light-cured
dimethacrylate-based dental resins. Biomaterials 2003; 24:
655-665.
12) da Silva EM, Poskus LT, Guimaraes JG, de Araujo Lima
Barcellos A, Fellows CE. Influence of light polymerization
modes on degree of conversion and crosslink density of dental
composites. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008; 19: 1027-1032.
13) Filho JD, Poskus LT, Guimaraes JG, Barcellos AA, Silva EM.
Degree of conversion and plasticization of dimethacrylate-
based polymeric matrices: influence of light-curing mode. J
Oral Sci 2008; 50: 315-321.
14) Dickens SH, Stansbury JW, Choi KM, Floyd CJE.
Photopolymerization kinetics of methacrylate dental resins.
Macromolecules 2003; 36: 6043-6053.
15) Suzuki S, Leinfelder KF. An in vitro evaluation of a
copolymerizable type of microfilled composite resin.
 Dent Mater J 2016; 35(2): 159–165
Quintessence Int 1994; 25: 59-64.
16) Kawai K, Iwami Y, Ebisu S. Effect of resin monomer
composition on toothbrush wear resistance. J Oral Rehabil
1998; 25: 264-268.
17) Ghasaban S, Atai M, Imani M, Zandi M, Shokrgozar MA.
Photo-crosslinkable cyanoacrylate bioadhesive: shrinkage
kinetics, dynamic mechanical properties, and biocompatibility
of adhesives containing TMPTMA and POSS nanostructures
as crosslinking agents. J Biomed Mater Res A 2011; 99: 240-
248.
18) da Silva EM, Poskus LT, Guimaraes JG. Influence of light-
polymerization modes on the degree of conversion and
mechanical properties of resin composites: a comparative
analysis between a hybrid and a nanofilled composite. Oper
Dent 2008; 33: 287-293.
19) Leprince JG, Palin WM, Hadis MA, Devaux J, Leloup G.
Progress in dimethacrylate-based dental composite technology
and curing efficiency. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 139-156.
20) Pfeifer CS, Silva LR, Kawano Y, Braga RR. Bis-GMA co-
polymerizations: influence on conversion, flexural properties,
fracture toughness and susceptibility to ethanol degradation
of experimental composites. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 1136-
1141.
21) Stansbury JW. Dimethacrylate network formation and
polymer property evolution as determined by the selection of
monomers and curing conditions. Dent Mater 2012; 28: 13-
View publication stats
165
22.
22) Ferracane JL. Hygroscopic and hydrolytic effects in dental
polymer networks. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 211-222.
23) Viljanen EK, Lassila LV, Skrifvars M, Vallittu PK. Degree
of conversion and flexural properties of a dendrimer/methyl
methacrylate copolymer: design of experiments and statistical
screening. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 172-177.
24) Yap AU, Ong LF, Teoh SH, Hastings GW. Comparative
wear ranking of dental restoratives with the BIOMAT wear
simulator. Part II. An SEM evaluation. J Oral Rehabil 2000;
27: 52-59.
25) Harrison A, Draughn RA. Abrasive wear, tensile strength, and
hardness of dental composite resins —is there a relationship?
J Prosthet Dent 1976; 36: 395-398.
26) Bayne SC. Correlation of clinical performance with ‘in vitro
tests’ of restorative dental materials that use polymer-based
matrices. Dent Mater 2012; 28: 52-71.
27) Örtengren U, Andersson F, Elgh U, Terselius B, Karlsson S.
Influence of pH and storage time on the sorption and solubility
behaviour of three composite resin materials. J Dent 2001;
29: 35-41.
28) da Silva EM, Almeida GS, Poskus LT, Guimaraes JG.
Relationship between the degree of conversion, solubility and
salivary sorption of a hybrid and a nanofilled resin composite.
J Appl Oral Sci 2008; 16: 161-166.