Journal of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics

Register      Login

VOLUME 6 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Role of Composition on Polymerization Shrinkage and Shrinkage Stress in Dental Composites

V Susila Anand

Keywords : Bulk-fill composites, Composite resin, Methacrylates, Ormocers, Polymerization shrinkage, Shrinkage stress, Silorane, Thiol-ene

Citation Information : Anand VS. Role of Composition on Polymerization Shrinkage and Shrinkage Stress in Dental Composites. J Oper Dent Endod 2021; 6 (1):31-44.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10047-0106

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-11-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Polymer-based dental composites are the widely used direct restorative materials. However, one of the disadvantages that include polymerization shrinkage, which leads to a cascade of effects like shrinkage stress, cusp deflection, enamel/dentinal cracks, marginal leakage, marginal discoloration, secondary caries, and postoperative sensitivity, needs eradication to improvise their performance. Polymerization shrinkage is the result of covalent bonds replacing van der Waals forces in a polymer. Many factors play a significant role in the polymerization shrinkage development, its magnitude, and the shrinkage stress. Viscosity, glass transition temperature, density, reaction kinetics, molecular mobility, modulus development, gel point, vitrification, degree of conversion, configuration (C) factor, and compliance of bonded surfaces dictate both the quantum of shrinkage and when it occurs and if and how its stresses are relieved. There are three efficient methods of reducing polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress. The first one focuses on reducing the reactive groups, the second one focuses on introducing new chemistries, and the third method focuses on controlling curing protocols. Increasing the molar volume and molecular weight of resins helps reduce reactive groups as is increasing the filler content. Alternative polymerization methods like ring-opening polymerization and step-growth polymerization have been very effective ways of reducing shrinkage. Debonding the fillers or using functionalized fillers or using different coupling agents based on chain transfer and dynamic covalent chemistry (DCC) are promising methods to relieve shrinkage stress. Modifying the available methacrylates; introducing certain chemicals; altering solvents, inhibitors, initiators, and coinitiators; using bulk-fill concept; and utilizing ormocer technology are also catching up with moderate to immense potential to reduce either shrinkage or shrinkage stress. Among filler modifications, nanogel incorporation, among matrix modifications, thiocarbonate and allyl sulfide introduction and among coupling agent modifications, using functionalized agents seem to be the best methods in either reducing shrinkage or shrinkage stress. Though laboratory investigations have been very much encouraging the above-mentioned methods, the real test of clinical studies is not as optimistic. Long-term clinical performance of materials based on these various methods has not been clinically significantly different from conventional materials. Nonetheless, some of the new materials have not yet gone through the rigor of long-term clinical studies and hence controlled clinical trials of such materials are highly recommended.

PDF Share
  1. Braga RR, Ballester RY, Ferracane JL. Factors involved in the development of polymerization shrinkage stress in resin-composites: a systematic review. Dent Mater 2005;21(10):962–970. DOI: 10.1016/
  2. Patel MP, Braden M, Davy KWM. Polymerization shrinkage of methacrylate esters. Biomaterials 1987;8(1):53–56. DOI: 10.1016/0142-9612(87)90030-5.
  3. Beigi Burujeny S, Atai M, Yeganeh H. Assessments of antibacterial and physico-mechanical properties for dental materials with chemically anchored quaternary ammonium moieties: thiol-ene-methacrylate vs. conventional methacrylate system. Dent Mater 2015;31(3):244–261. DOI: 10.1016/
  4. Schneider LF, Cavalcante LM, Silikas N. Shrinkage stresses generated during resin-composite application: a review. J Dent Biomech 2010;2010:131630. DOI: 10.4061/2010/131630.
  5. Magali D, Delphine TB, Jacques D, et al. Volume contraction in photocured dental resins: the shrinkage-conversion relationship revisited. Dent Mater 2006;22(4):359–365. DOI: 10.1016/
  6. Calheiros FC, Sadek FT, Braga RR, et al. Polymerization contraction stress of low-shrinkage composites and its correlation with microleakage in class V restorations. J Dent 2004;32(5):407–412. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2004.01.014.
  7. Charton C, Falk V, Marchal P, et al. Influence of Tg, viscosity and chemical structure of monomers on shrinkage stress in light-cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins Dent Mater 2007;23(11):1447–1459. DOI: 10.1016/
  8. Meereis CTW, Münchow EA, Oliveira da Rosa WL, et al. Polymerization shrinkage stress of resin-based dental materials: a systematic review and metaanalyses of composition strategies. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2018;82:268–281. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.03.019.
  9. Carioscia JA, Lu H, Stanbury JW, et al. Thiol-ene oligomers as dental restorative materials. Dent Mater 2005;21(12):1137–1143. DOI: 10.1016/
  10. Moraes RR, Garcia JW, Barros MD, et al. Control of polymerization shrinkage and stress in nanogel-modified monomer and composite materials. Dent Mater 2011;27(6):509–519. DOI: 10.1016/
  11. He J, Kopperud HM. Preparation and characterization of Bis-GMA-free dental composites with dimethacrylate monomer derived from 9,9-Bis[4-(2-hydroxyethoxy)phenyl]fluorene. Dent Mater 2018;34(7):1003–1013. DOI: 10.1016/
  12. Ge J, Trujillo M, Stanbury J. Synthesis and photopolymerization of low shrinkage methacrylate monomers containing bulky substituent groups. Dent Mater 2005;21(12):1163–1169. DOI: 10.1016/
  13. Moszner N, Salz U. Recent developments of new components for dental adhesives and composites. Macromol Mater Eng 2007;292(3):245–271. DOI: 10.1002/mame.200600414.
  14. Cramer NB, Stanbury JW, Bowman CN. Recent advances and developments in composite dental restorative materials. J Dent Res 2011;90(4):402–416. DOI: 10.1177/0022034510381263.
  15. Soh MS, Yap AUJ, Sellinger A. Physicomechanical evaluation of low-shrinkage dental nanocomposites based on silsesquioxane cores. Eur J Oral Sci 2007;115(3):230–238. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2007.00449.x.
  16. Bailey WJ, Chou JL, Feng PZ, et al. Recent advances in free-radical ring-opening polymerization. J Macromol Sci-Chem 1988; A25 (5–7):781–798. DOI: 10.1080/00222338808053398.
  17. Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater 2005;21(1):68–74. DOI: 10.1016/
  18. Byerley TJ, Eick JD, Chen GP, et al. Synthesis and polymerization of new expanding dental monomers. Dent Mater 1992;8(6):345–350. DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(92)90016-6.
  19. Stansbury JW. Synthesis and evaluation of novel multifunctional oligomers for dentistry. JDR 1992;71(3):434–437. DOI: 10.1177/00220345920710030201.
  20. Magno MB, Nascimento GCR, Paula da Rocha YS, et al. Silorane-based composite resin restorations are not better than conventional composites – a meta analysis of clinical studies. J Adhes Dent 2016;18(5):375–386. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a36916.
  21. Kolb HC, Finn MG, Sharpless KB. Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angew Chem Int Ed 2001;40(11):2004–2021. DOI: 10.1002/1521-3773(20010601)40:11<2004: aid-anie2004>;2-x.
  22. Pfeifer CS, Wilson ND, Shelton ZR, et al. Delayed gelation through chain-transfer reactions: mechanism for stress reduction in methacrylate networks. Polymer 2011;52(15):3295–3303. DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2011.05.034.
  23. Erhardt MCG, Goulart M, Jacques RC, et al. Effect of different composite modulation protocols on the conversion and polymerization stress profile of bulk-filled resin restorations. Dent Mater 2020;36(7):829–837. DOI: 10.1016/
  24. Lu H, Carioscia JA, Stansbury JW, et al. Investigations of step-growth thiol-ene polymerizations for novel dental restoratives. Dent Mater 2005;21(12):1129–1136. DOI: 10.1016/
  25. Sowan N, Dobson A, Podgorski M, et al. Dynamic covalent chemistry (DCC) in dental restorative materials: implementation of a DCC-based adaptive interface (AI) at the resin–filler interface for improved performance. Dent Mater 2020;36(1):53–59. DOI: 10.1016/
  26. Klee JE, Schneider C, Hölter D, et al. Hyperbranched polyesters and their application in dental composites: monomers for low shrinking composites. Polym Adv Technol 2001;12(6):346–354. DOI: 10.1002/pat.116.
  27. Chung CM, Kim JG, Kim MS, et al. Development of a new photocurable composite resin with reduced curing shrinkage. Dent Mater 2002;18(2):174–178. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(01)00039-2.
  28. Leprince JG, Palin WM, Hadis MA, et al. Progress in dimethacrylate-based dental composite technology and curing efficiency. Dent Mater 2013;29(2):139–156. DOI: 10.1016/
  29. He J, Söderling E, Lassila LVJ, et al. Preparation of antibacterial and radio-opaque dental resin with new polymerizable quaternary ammonium monomer. Dent Mater 2015;31(5):575–582. DOI: 10.1016/
  30. Wang X, Huyang G, Palagummi SV, et al. High performance dental resin composites with hydrolytically stable monomers. Dent Mater 2018;34(2):228–237. DOI: 10.1016/
  31. He J, Garoushi S, Säilynoja E, et al. The effect of adding a new monomer “Phene” on the polymerization shrinkage reduction of a dental resin composite. Dent Mater 2019;35(4):627–635. DOI: 10.1016/
  32. Podgórski M. Synthesis and characterization of acetyloxypropylene dimethacrylate as a new dental monomer. Dent Mater 2011;27(8):748–754. DOI: 10.1016/
  33. 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(10):1229–1235. DOI: 10.1016/
  34. Atai M, Ahmadi M, Babanzadeh S, et al. Synthesis, characterization, shrinkage and curing kinetics of a new low-shrinkage urethane dimethacrylate monomer for dental applications. Dent Mater 2007;23(8):1030–1041. DOI: 10.1016/
  35. Barszczewska-Rybarek IM. Characterization of urethane-dimethacrylate derivatives as alternative monomers for the restorative composite matrix. Dent Mater 2014;30(12):1336–1344. DOI: 10.1016/
  36. Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDRTM technology. Dent Mater 2011;27(4):348–355. DOI: 10.1016/
  37. van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U. A randomized controlled three year evaluation of “bulk-filled” posterior resin restorations based on stress decreasing resin technology. Dent Mater 2014;30(9):e245–e251. DOI: 10.1016/
  38. Song HB, Sowan N, Shah PK, et al. Reduced shrinkage stress via photo-initiated copper(I)-catalyzed cycloaddition polymerizations of azide-alkyne resins. Dent Mater 2016;32(11):1332–1342. DOI: 10.1016/
  39. Palin WM, Hadis MA, Leprince JG, et al. Reduced polymerization stress of MAPO-containing resin composites with increased curing speed, degree of conversion and mechanical properties. Dent Mater 2014;30(5):507–516. DOI: 10.1016/
  40. Furuse AY, Mondelli J, Watts DC. Network structures of Bis-GMA/TEGDMA resins differ in DC, shrinkage-strain, hardness and optical properties as a function of reducing agent. Dent Mater 2011;27(5):497–506. DOI: 10.1016/
  41. Boaro LCC, Lopes DP, Caetano de Souza AS, et al. Clinical performance and chemical-physical properties of bulk fill composites resin—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Mater 2019;35(10):e249–e264. DOI: 10.1016/
  42. Nicholson J, Czarnecka B. Composite resins. In: Materials for the direct restoration of teeth. Elsevier; 2016. p. 37–67. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-100491-3.00003-9.
  43. Kruly PC, Giannini M, Pascotto RC, et al. Meta-analysis of the clinical behavior of posterior direct resin restorations: low polymerization shrinkage resin in comparison to methacrylate composite resin. PLoS One 2018;13(2):e0191942. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191942.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.