Effect of pH and storage time on the elution of residual monomers from polymerized composite resins

Cheol-Min Jeon; Hyun-Mi Yoo; Hyuk-Choon Kwon

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.3.249

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(3); 2004 > Article

Original Article Effect of pH and storage time on the elution of residual monomers from polymerized composite resins: Cheol-Min Jeon¹, Hyun-Mi Yoo², Hyuk-Choon Kwon¹; 2004;29(3):-266.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.3.249
Published online: May 31, 2004

¹Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Korea.

²Department of Conservative Dentistry, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University, School of Medicine, Korea.

Corresponding author: Hyuk-Choon Kwon. Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University, 28-2 Yeongun-dong, Chongro-gu, Seoul, Korea, 110-749. Tel: 82-2-2647-2882, Fax: 82-2-2647-7528, juhohyun@hanmail.net

329 Views
0 Download
2 Crossref

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

Objectives
The purpose of this study was to determine whether pH and time has any influence on the degradation behavior of composite restoration by analyzing the leached monomers of dental composites qualitatively and quantitatively after storage in acetate buffer solution as a function of time using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) / mass spectrometer.
Materials and Methods
Three commercial composite restorative resin materials (Z-250, Heliomolar and Aeliteflo) with different matrix structure and filler composition were studied. Thirty specimens (7mm diameter×2mm thick) of each material were prepared. The cured materials were stored in acetate buffer solution at different pH (4, 7) for 1, 7 and 45days. As a reference, samples of unpolymerized composite materials of each product were treated with methanol (10 mg/ml). Identification of the various compounds was achieved by comparison of their mass spectra with those of reference compound, with literature data, and by their fragmentation patterns. Data were analysed statistically using ANOVA and Duncan's test.
Results
1. Amounts of leached TEGDMA in Aeliteflo were significantly larger than those of UDMA in Z-250 and Heliomolar at experimental conditions of different storage time and pH variation (p < 0.001).

2. As to comparison of the amounts of leached monomers per sorage time, amounts of leached TEGDMA in Aeliteflo and UDMA in Z-250 and Heliomolar were increased in the pH 4 solution more significantly than in the pH 7 solution after 1day, 7days and 45days, respectively (p < 0.001).

3. In total amounts of all the leached monomers with storage times, the overall amounts of pH 4 extracts were larger than those of pH 7 extracts for all resin groups, but there was no significant difference (p > 0.05).
Keywords: Light cured composite resin; Leaching of residual monomers; pH variation; High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)

Figure 1

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Aeliteflo (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 2

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 3

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 4

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Z-250 (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 5

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 6

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 7

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Heliomolar (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 8

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material)

Figure 9

LC / MS - chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material)

Peak A ; Internal caffeine standard, fragmented methyl methacrylate, methacrylic acid, etc.

Peak B ; TEGDMA (triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate)

Peak C ; UDMA (urethane dimethacrylate)

Peak D ; Bis-GMA (Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate)

Peak E ; Unidentified, probably related to Bis-EMA (Ethoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate)

Peak F,G ; A certain dimer or oligomer

Figure 10

MS spectra of Caffeine (9min)

Figure 11

MS spectra of TEGDMA (14min)

Figure 12

MS spectra of UDMA (21min)

Figure 13

MS spectra of Bis-GMA (23min)

Figure 14

Leached TEGDMA of Aeliteflo

Figure 15

Leached UDMA of Z-250

Figure 16

Leached UDMA of Heliomolar

Figure 17

Total amount of leached monomers according to storage time

Table 1

Commercial light-cured dental composite resins used in this study.

Bis-GMA = Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate

TEGDMA = Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA = Etoxylated Bisphenol A dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA (6) = Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate

UEDMA = Urethane dimethacrylate

D₃MA = Decamethacrylate

Table 2

Experimental conditions according to different pH and storage time.

Table 3

Dilution of standard solution (STD) and storage solution

^*ppm = mg/L

Table 4

Conditions of HPLC

Table 5

Isolated monomers released at its specific retention time.

^*Bis-EMA (6) ; Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate.

Table 6

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to TEGDMA

Table 7

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to UDMA

Table 8

Leached monomer content of Aelitflo groups

^*%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*STD = standard solution (unpolymerized material)

Table 9

Leached monomer content of Z-250 groups

Table 10

Leached monomer content of Heliomolar groups

Table 11

Amount of leached TEGDMA and UDMA according to storage time (%CF), n = 15

^*: significantly different on the horizontal line (p < 0.001)

▸values with the same subscript letter in the same row are not significantly different (p > 0.05)

Table 12

Relative percentage of cumulative monomers following 45days storage as to original concentration

^▾%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*%Sol = percentage related to original concentration of STD

REFERENCES

1. Antonucci JM, Bowen RL. Dimethacrylates derived from hydroxylbenzoic acid. J Dent Res. 1976;55: 8-15.Article PubMed PDF
2. Asmussen E. Factors affecting the quantity of remaining double bonds in restorative resin polymers. Scand J Dent Res. 1982;90: 490-496.Article PubMed
3. Antonucci JM, Toth EE. Extent of polymerization of dental resins by differential scanning calorimetry. J Dent Res. 1983;62(2):121-125.Article PubMed PDF
4. Ruyter IE, Oysaed H. Compressive creep of light cure resin based restorative materials. Acta Odontol Scand. 1982;40: 319-324.PubMed
5. Hanks CT, Craig RG, Diehl ML, Pashley DH. Cytotoxity of dental composites and other materials in a new in vitro device. J Oral Pathol. 1988;17: 396-403.PubMed
6. Ferracane JL, Berge HX, Condon JR. In vitro aging of dental composites in water-effect of degree of conversion, filler volume, and filler/matrix coupling. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;42: 465-472.Article PubMed
7. Ferracane JL, DeWald JP. A comparison of four modes of evaluating depth of cure of light activated composite. J Dent Res. 1987;66(3):727-730.Article PubMed PDF
8. Ferracane JL, Condon JR. Rate of elution of leachable components from composite. Dent Mater. 1990;6: 282-287.Article PubMed
9. Inoue K, Hayashi I. Residual monomer (Bis-GMA) of composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 1982;9: 493-497.Article PubMed
10. Tanaka K, Taira M, Shintani H, Wakasa K. Residual monomer(TEGDMA and Bis-GMA)of a set visable-light-cured dental composite resin when immersed in water. J Oral Rehabil. 1991;18: 353-362.PubMed
11. Dickens SH, Stansbury JW, Floyd CJ. Effects of chemical composition on cure properties of dental resins. J Dent Res. 1999;78: 1459-1463.PubMed
12. Ferracane JL. Elution of leachable components from composites. J Oral Rehabil. 1994;21: 441-452.Article PubMed
13. Gerzina TM, Hume WR. Effect of Dentin on the release of TEGDMA from resin composite in vitro. J Oral Rehabil. 1994;21: 463-468.PubMed
14. Santerre JP, Shajii L, Leung BW. Relation of dental composite formulations to their degradation and the release of hydrolyzed polymeric-resin-derived product. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2001;12(2):136-151.PubMed
15. Van Groeningen G, Arends J. Composite degradation in vivo. Dent Mater. 1986;2: 225-227.Article PubMed
16. Göpferich A. Mechanism of polymer degradation and erosion. Biomaterials. 1996;17: 103-114.Article PubMed
17. Wu W, Toth EE, Moffa JF, Ellison JA. Subsurface damage layer of in vivo worn dental composite restorations. J Dent Res. 1984;63(5):675-680.Article PubMed PDF
18. Wu W, Mckinney JE. Influence of chemicals on wear of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1982;61(10):1180-1183.Article PubMed PDF
19. Soderholm KJ, Zigan M, Ragan M, Bergman M. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1984;63: 1248-1254.Article PubMed PDF
20. Soderholm KJ. Degradation of glass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res. 1981;60: 1867-1872.Article PubMed PDF
21. Hanks CT. Cytotoxic Effects of resin components on culture mammalian fibroblasts. J Dent Res. 1991;70: 1450-1455.Article PubMed PDF
22. Nassiri MR, Hanks CT, Cameron MJ, Strawn SE, Craig RG. Application of Flow cytometry to determine the cytotoxicity of urethane dimethacrylate in human cells. J Biomed Mater Res. 1994;28: 153-158.Article PubMed
23. Cherry BA, Moon PC, Kalini MY. Estrogenic activity of combined admistration of two possible dental resins. J Dent Res. 1998;77(AADR abst):1080.
24. Arenholt-Bindslev D, Breinholt V, Schmalz G, Preiss A. Time-related bisphenol-A content and estrogenic activity in saliva samples collected in relation to placement of fissure sealants. Clin Oral Investig. 1999;3(3):120-125.Article PubMed PDF
25. McKinney JE, Wu W. Chemical softening and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1985;64: 1326-1331.Article PubMed PDF
26. Geddes DA. Acids produced by human dantal plaque metabolism in situ. Caries Res. 1975;9: 98-109.Article PubMed
27. Asmussen E. Softening of Bis-GMA based polymers by ethanol and by organic acids of plaque. Scand J Dent Res. 1984;92: 257-261.Article PubMed
28. Choi JH. Gigi bunseog gaelon mich eung-yong. 1998;100-165.
29. Lingstrom P, Imfeld T, Birkhed D. Comparison of three different methods for measurement of plaque-pH in humans after consumption of soft bread and potato chips. J Dent Res. 1993;72(5):865-870.Article PubMed PDF
30. Chadwick RG, McCabe JF, Walls AW, Storer R. The effect of storage media upon the surface microhardness and abrasion resistance if three composites. Dent Mater. 1990;6: 123-128.PubMed
31. Larsen IB, Freund M, Munksgaard EC. Change in surface hardness of BIS_GMA/TEGDMA polymer due to enzymatic action. J Dent Res. 1992;71(11):1851-1853.Article PubMed PDF
32. Yap AU, Tan SH, Wee SS, Lee CW. Chemical degradation of composite restoratives. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28: 1015-1021.Article PubMed
33. Freund M, Munksgaard EC. Enzymatic degradation of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-polymers causing decreased microhardness and greater wear in vitro. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98: 351-356.Article PubMed
34. Jaffer F, Finer Y, Santerre JP. Interaction between resin monomer and commercial composite resins with human saliva derived esterases. Biomaterials. 2002;23(7):1707-1719.Article PubMed
35. Santerre JP, Shajii L. Biodegradation of commercial dental composites by Cholesterol Esterase. J Dent Res. 1999;78(8):1459-1468.Article PubMed PDF
36. Ruyter IE. Physical and chemical aspects related to substances released from polymer materials in an aqueous environment. Advan Dent Res. 1995;9: 344-349.Article PDF
37. Ortengren U, Wellendorf H, Karlsson S, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and solubility of dental composite and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28(12):1106-1115.PubMed
38. Lee SY, Huang HM. Leached components from dental composites in oral simulating fluids and the resultant composite strengths. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25: 575-588.Article PubMed PDF
39. Ortengren U, Andersson F. Influence of pH and storage time on the sorption and solubility behaviour of three composite resin materials. J Dent. 2001;29: 35-41.Article PubMed
40. Braden M, Davy KW. Water absorption characteristics of some unfilled resins. Biomaterials. 1986;7: 474-475.Article PubMed
41. Muller H, Olsson S, Soderholm KJ. The effect of comonomer composition, silane heating and filler type on aqueous TEGDMA lechability in model resin composites. Eur J Oral Sci. 1997;105: 362-376.PubMed
42. Braden M, Clarke RL. Water absorption characteristics of dental microfine composite filling materials. Biomaterials. 1984;5: 369-372.Article PubMed
43. Øysaed H, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and filler characteristics of composites for use in posterior teeth. J Dent Res. 1986;65: 1315-1318.Article PubMed PDF
44. Geurtsen W. Substances released from dental resin composites and glass ionomer cements. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106: 687-695.Article PubMed PDF
45. Soderholm KJ. Degradation of grass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res. 1981;60(11):1867-1875.Article PubMed PDF
46. Göpferich A. Mechanism of polymer degradation and erosion. Biomaterials. 1996;17: 103-114.Article PubMed
47. Munksgaard EC, Freund M. Enzymatic hydrolysis of(di) methacrylates and their polymers. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98: 261-267.Article PubMed
48. Qvist V. Pulp reactions in human teeth to tooth colored filling material. Scand J Dent Res. 1975;83: 54-66.PubMed
49. Geurtsen W, Spahl W, Leyhausen G. Residual monomer/additive release and variability in cytotoxicity of light-curing glass-ionomer cement and compomers. J Dent Res. 1998;77: 2012-2019.Article PubMed PDF
50. Hume WR, Hood AM. Comparing cytotoxicity in vitro between cured and uncured composite resins. J Dent Res. 1990;69: 943-951.
51. Stanley HR. Compatability of various materials with oral tissues. J Dent Res. 1979;58: 1507-1517.PubMed
52. Stanley HR. Pulpal consideration of adhesive material. Oper Dent. 1992;Suppl 5: 151-164.PubMed
53. Rathbun MA, Craig RG, Hanks CT. Cytotoxity of a Bis-GMA dental composite before and after leaching in organic solvent. J Biomed Mater Res. 1991;25: 443-457.Article PubMed

Tables & Figures

Figure 1

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Aeliteflo (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 2

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 3

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 4

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Z-250 (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 5

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 6

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 7

LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Heliomolar (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 8

LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material)

Figure 9

LC / MS - chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material)

Peak A ; Internal caffeine standard, fragmented methyl methacrylate, methacrylic acid, etc.

Peak B ; TEGDMA (triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate)

Peak C ; UDMA (urethane dimethacrylate)

Peak D ; Bis-GMA (Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate)

Peak E ; Unidentified, probably related to Bis-EMA (Ethoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate)

Peak F,G ; A certain dimer or oligomer

Figure 10

MS spectra of Caffeine (9min)

Figure 11

MS spectra of TEGDMA (14min)

Figure 12

MS spectra of UDMA (21min)

Figure 13

MS spectra of Bis-GMA (23min)

Figure 14

Leached TEGDMA of Aeliteflo

Figure 15

Leached UDMA of Z-250

Figure 16

Leached UDMA of Heliomolar

Figure 17

Total amount of leached monomers according to storage time

Table 1

Commercial light-cured dental composite resins used in this study.

Bis-GMA = Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate

TEGDMA = Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA = Etoxylated Bisphenol A dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA (6) = Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate

UEDMA = Urethane dimethacrylate

D₃MA = Decamethacrylate

Table 2

Experimental conditions according to different pH and storage time.

Table 3

Dilution of standard solution (STD) and storage solution

^*ppm = mg/L

Table 4

Conditions of HPLC

Table 5

Isolated monomers released at its specific retention time.

^*Bis-EMA (6) ; Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate.

Table 6

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to TEGDMA

Table 7

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to UDMA

Table 8

Leached monomer content of Aelitflo groups

^*%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*STD = standard solution (unpolymerized material)

Table 9

Leached monomer content of Z-250 groups

Table 10

Leached monomer content of Heliomolar groups

Table 11

Amount of leached TEGDMA and UDMA according to storage time (%CF), n = 15

^*: significantly different on the horizontal line (p < 0.001)

▸values with the same subscript letter in the same row are not significantly different (p > 0.05)

Table 12

Relative percentage of cumulative monomers following 45days storage as to original concentration

^▾%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*%Sol = percentage related to original concentration of STD

REFERENCES

1. Antonucci JM, Bowen RL. Dimethacrylates derived from hydroxylbenzoic acid. J Dent Res. 1976;55: 8-15.Article PubMed PDF
2. Asmussen E. Factors affecting the quantity of remaining double bonds in restorative resin polymers. Scand J Dent Res. 1982;90: 490-496.Article PubMed
3. Antonucci JM, Toth EE. Extent of polymerization of dental resins by differential scanning calorimetry. J Dent Res. 1983;62(2):121-125.Article PubMed PDF
4. Ruyter IE, Oysaed H. Compressive creep of light cure resin based restorative materials. Acta Odontol Scand. 1982;40: 319-324.PubMed
5. Hanks CT, Craig RG, Diehl ML, Pashley DH. Cytotoxity of dental composites and other materials in a new in vitro device. J Oral Pathol. 1988;17: 396-403.PubMed
6. Ferracane JL, Berge HX, Condon JR. In vitro aging of dental composites in water-effect of degree of conversion, filler volume, and filler/matrix coupling. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;42: 465-472.Article PubMed
7. Ferracane JL, DeWald JP. A comparison of four modes of evaluating depth of cure of light activated composite. J Dent Res. 1987;66(3):727-730.Article PubMed PDF
8. Ferracane JL, Condon JR. Rate of elution of leachable components from composite. Dent Mater. 1990;6: 282-287.Article PubMed
9. Inoue K, Hayashi I. Residual monomer (Bis-GMA) of composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 1982;9: 493-497.Article PubMed
10. Tanaka K, Taira M, Shintani H, Wakasa K. Residual monomer(TEGDMA and Bis-GMA)of a set visable-light-cured dental composite resin when immersed in water. J Oral Rehabil. 1991;18: 353-362.PubMed
11. Dickens SH, Stansbury JW, Floyd CJ. Effects of chemical composition on cure properties of dental resins. J Dent Res. 1999;78: 1459-1463.PubMed
12. Ferracane JL. Elution of leachable components from composites. J Oral Rehabil. 1994;21: 441-452.Article PubMed
13. Gerzina TM, Hume WR. Effect of Dentin on the release of TEGDMA from resin composite in vitro. J Oral Rehabil. 1994;21: 463-468.PubMed
14. Santerre JP, Shajii L, Leung BW. Relation of dental composite formulations to their degradation and the release of hydrolyzed polymeric-resin-derived product. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2001;12(2):136-151.PubMed
15. Van Groeningen G, Arends J. Composite degradation in vivo. Dent Mater. 1986;2: 225-227.Article PubMed
16. Göpferich A. Mechanism of polymer degradation and erosion. Biomaterials. 1996;17: 103-114.Article PubMed
17. Wu W, Toth EE, Moffa JF, Ellison JA. Subsurface damage layer of in vivo worn dental composite restorations. J Dent Res. 1984;63(5):675-680.Article PubMed PDF
18. Wu W, Mckinney JE. Influence of chemicals on wear of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1982;61(10):1180-1183.Article PubMed PDF
19. Soderholm KJ, Zigan M, Ragan M, Bergman M. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1984;63: 1248-1254.Article PubMed PDF
20. Soderholm KJ. Degradation of glass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res. 1981;60: 1867-1872.Article PubMed PDF
21. Hanks CT. Cytotoxic Effects of resin components on culture mammalian fibroblasts. J Dent Res. 1991;70: 1450-1455.Article PubMed PDF
22. Nassiri MR, Hanks CT, Cameron MJ, Strawn SE, Craig RG. Application of Flow cytometry to determine the cytotoxicity of urethane dimethacrylate in human cells. J Biomed Mater Res. 1994;28: 153-158.Article PubMed
23. Cherry BA, Moon PC, Kalini MY. Estrogenic activity of combined admistration of two possible dental resins. J Dent Res. 1998;77(AADR abst):1080.
24. Arenholt-Bindslev D, Breinholt V, Schmalz G, Preiss A. Time-related bisphenol-A content and estrogenic activity in saliva samples collected in relation to placement of fissure sealants. Clin Oral Investig. 1999;3(3):120-125.Article PubMed PDF
25. McKinney JE, Wu W. Chemical softening and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1985;64: 1326-1331.Article PubMed PDF
26. Geddes DA. Acids produced by human dantal plaque metabolism in situ. Caries Res. 1975;9: 98-109.Article PubMed
27. Asmussen E. Softening of Bis-GMA based polymers by ethanol and by organic acids of plaque. Scand J Dent Res. 1984;92: 257-261.Article PubMed
28. Choi JH. Gigi bunseog gaelon mich eung-yong. 1998;100-165.
29. Lingstrom P, Imfeld T, Birkhed D. Comparison of three different methods for measurement of plaque-pH in humans after consumption of soft bread and potato chips. J Dent Res. 1993;72(5):865-870.Article PubMed PDF
30. Chadwick RG, McCabe JF, Walls AW, Storer R. The effect of storage media upon the surface microhardness and abrasion resistance if three composites. Dent Mater. 1990;6: 123-128.PubMed
31. Larsen IB, Freund M, Munksgaard EC. Change in surface hardness of BIS_GMA/TEGDMA polymer due to enzymatic action. J Dent Res. 1992;71(11):1851-1853.Article PubMed PDF
32. Yap AU, Tan SH, Wee SS, Lee CW. Chemical degradation of composite restoratives. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28: 1015-1021.Article PubMed
33. Freund M, Munksgaard EC. Enzymatic degradation of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-polymers causing decreased microhardness and greater wear in vitro. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98: 351-356.Article PubMed
34. Jaffer F, Finer Y, Santerre JP. Interaction between resin monomer and commercial composite resins with human saliva derived esterases. Biomaterials. 2002;23(7):1707-1719.Article PubMed
35. Santerre JP, Shajii L. Biodegradation of commercial dental composites by Cholesterol Esterase. J Dent Res. 1999;78(8):1459-1468.Article PubMed PDF
36. Ruyter IE. Physical and chemical aspects related to substances released from polymer materials in an aqueous environment. Advan Dent Res. 1995;9: 344-349.Article PDF
37. Ortengren U, Wellendorf H, Karlsson S, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and solubility of dental composite and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28(12):1106-1115.PubMed
38. Lee SY, Huang HM. Leached components from dental composites in oral simulating fluids and the resultant composite strengths. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25: 575-588.Article PubMed PDF
39. Ortengren U, Andersson F. Influence of pH and storage time on the sorption and solubility behaviour of three composite resin materials. J Dent. 2001;29: 35-41.Article PubMed
40. Braden M, Davy KW. Water absorption characteristics of some unfilled resins. Biomaterials. 1986;7: 474-475.Article PubMed
41. Muller H, Olsson S, Soderholm KJ. The effect of comonomer composition, silane heating and filler type on aqueous TEGDMA lechability in model resin composites. Eur J Oral Sci. 1997;105: 362-376.PubMed
42. Braden M, Clarke RL. Water absorption characteristics of dental microfine composite filling materials. Biomaterials. 1984;5: 369-372.Article PubMed
43. Øysaed H, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and filler characteristics of composites for use in posterior teeth. J Dent Res. 1986;65: 1315-1318.Article PubMed PDF
44. Geurtsen W. Substances released from dental resin composites and glass ionomer cements. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106: 687-695.Article PubMed PDF
45. Soderholm KJ. Degradation of grass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res. 1981;60(11):1867-1875.Article PubMed PDF
46. Göpferich A. Mechanism of polymer degradation and erosion. Biomaterials. 1996;17: 103-114.Article PubMed
47. Munksgaard EC, Freund M. Enzymatic hydrolysis of(di) methacrylates and their polymers. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98: 261-267.Article PubMed
48. Qvist V. Pulp reactions in human teeth to tooth colored filling material. Scand J Dent Res. 1975;83: 54-66.PubMed
49. Geurtsen W, Spahl W, Leyhausen G. Residual monomer/additive release and variability in cytotoxicity of light-curing glass-ionomer cement and compomers. J Dent Res. 1998;77: 2012-2019.Article PubMed PDF
50. Hume WR, Hood AM. Comparing cytotoxicity in vitro between cured and uncured composite resins. J Dent Res. 1990;69: 943-951.
51. Stanley HR. Compatability of various materials with oral tissues. J Dent Res. 1979;58: 1507-1517.PubMed
52. Stanley HR. Pulpal consideration of adhesive material. Oper Dent. 1992;Suppl 5: 151-164.PubMed
53. Rathbun MA, Craig RG, Hanks CT. Cytotoxity of a Bis-GMA dental composite before and after leaching in organic solvent. J Biomed Mater Res. 1991;25: 443-457.Article PubMed

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Release of Bisphenol A from Pit and Fissure Sealants According to Different pH Conditions
Eun-Deok Jo, Sang-Bae Lee, Chung-Min Kang, Kwang-Mahn Kim, Jae-Sung Kwon
Polymers.2021; 14(1): 37. CrossRef
Comparison of polymerization shrinkage of dual-cure core build-up resin according to shade and curing mode
Yoorina Choi, Karl Lee, Hoon-Sang Chang
Oral Biology Research.2019; 43(4): 243. CrossRef

CanvasJS.com

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Effect of pH and storage time on the elution of residual monomers from polymerized composite resins

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(3):249-266. Published online May 31, 2004

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.3.249

XML Download

Figure

Related articles

Effects of different curing methods on the color stability of composite resins

Effect of pH and storage time on the elution of residual monomers from polymerized composite resins

Figure 1 LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Aeliteflo (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 2 LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 3 LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Aeliteflo (Polymerized material)

Figure 4 LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Z-250 (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 5 LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 6 LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Z-250 (Polymerized material)

Figure 7 LC / MS-chromatogram of STD from Heliomolar (Unpolymerized material)

Figure 8 LC / MS-chromatogram of pH 4 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material)

Figure 9 LC / MS - chromatogram of pH 7 extract from Heliomolar (Polymerized material) Peak A ; Internal caffeine standard, fragmented methyl methacrylate, methacrylic acid, etc. Peak B ; TEGDMA (triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate) Peak C ; UDMA (urethane dimethacrylate) Peak D ; Bis-GMA (Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate) Peak E ; Unidentified, probably related to Bis-EMA (Ethoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate) Peak F,G ; A certain dimer or oligomer

Figure 10 MS spectra of Caffeine (9min)

Figure 11 MS spectra of TEGDMA (14min)

Figure 12 MS spectra of UDMA (21min)

Figure 13 MS spectra of Bis-GMA (23min)

Figure 14 Leached TEGDMA of Aeliteflo

Figure 15 Leached UDMA of Z-250

Figure 16 Leached UDMA of Heliomolar

Figure 17 Total amount of leached monomers according to storage time

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Effect of pH and storage time on the elution of residual monomers from polymerized composite resins

Table 1

Commercial light-cured dental composite resins used in this study.

Bis-GMA = Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate

TEGDMA = Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA = Etoxylated Bisphenol A dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA (6) = Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate

UEDMA = Urethane dimethacrylate

D₃MA = Decamethacrylate

Table 2

Experimental conditions according to different pH and storage time.

Table 3

Dilution of standard solution (STD) and storage solution

^*ppm = mg/L

Table 4

Conditions of HPLC

Table 5

Isolated monomers released at its specific retention time.

^*Bis-EMA (6) ; Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate.

Table 6

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to TEGDMA

Table 7

Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to UDMA

Table 8

Leached monomer content of Aelitflo groups

^*%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*STD = standard solution (unpolymerized material)

Table 9

Leached monomer content of Z-250 groups

Table 10

Leached monomer content of Heliomolar groups

Table 11

Amount of leached TEGDMA and UDMA according to storage time (%CF), n = 15

^*: significantly different on the horizontal line (p < 0.001)

▸values with the same subscript letter in the same row are not significantly different (p > 0.05)

Table 12

Relative percentage of cumulative monomers following 45days storage as to original concentration

^▾%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*%Sol = percentage related to original concentration of STD

Table 1 Commercial light-cured dental composite resins used in this study.

Bis-GMA = Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate

TEGDMA = Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA = Etoxylated Bisphenol A dimethacrylate

Bis-EMA (6) = Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate

UEDMA = Urethane dimethacrylate

D₃MA = Decamethacrylate

Table 2 Experimental conditions according to different pH and storage time.

Table 3 Dilution of standard solution (STD) and storage solution

^*ppm = mg/L

Table 4 Conditions of HPLC

Table 5 Isolated monomers released at its specific retention time.

^*Bis-EMA (6) ; Bisphenol A polyetheylene glycol diether dimethacrylate.

Table 6 Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to TEGDMA

Table 7 Chemical structure of fragmented ions related to UDMA

Table 8 Leached monomer content of Aelitflo groups

^*%CF = percentage related to the internal caffeine standard

^*STD = standard solution (unpolymerized material)

Table 9 Leached monomer content of Z-250 groups

Table 10 Leached monomer content of Heliomolar groups

Table 11 Amount of leached TEGDMA and UDMA according to storage time (%CF), n = 15

^*: significantly different on the horizontal line (p < 0.001)

▸values with the same subscript letter in the same row are not significantly different (p > 0.05)

Table 12 Relative percentage of cumulative monomers following 45days storage as to original concentration