PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15595745

Polymerizable bis(2-ethylhexyl)sulfosuccinate: application in microemulsion polymerization.

Abstract

A hygroscopic and polymerizable salt ([2-methacryloyloxy]ethyl trimethylammonium chloride) is used to ion exchange the sodium ion in AOT (bis[2-ethylhexyl]sulfosuccinate, sodium salt) to produce a polymerizable form of AOT, MDOS ([2-methacryloyloxy]ethyl trimethylammonium bis[2-ethylhexyl]sulfosuccinate). A partial ternary phase diagram of water, MDOS, and methyl methacrylate (MMA) was determined at room temperature (22 +/- 1 degrees C). A relatively large L2 domain is obtained, but this domain is smaller than that obtained with AOT. Microemulsion polymerization in this domain at 70 degrees C, using AIBN (azoisobutyronitrile) as an initiator, produces an optically clear copolymer solid domain nearly as large as the L2 domain. This interesting behavior contrasts with similar studies of Pavel and Mackay [Langmuir 2000, 16, 8528] using a polymerizable surfactant DDAMA (didecyldimethylammonium methacrylate) that produced a much larger L2 domain than MDOS but yielded a much smaller optically clear domain after thermally initiated polymerization. Thermogravimetric analysis indicates that optically clear composites obtained at an MDOS/MMA weight ratio of 1:4 and containing 5% water (w/w; weight % water in microemulsion) released the water in a transition commencing around 160 degrees C and continuing to 250 degrees C. Thereafter, the thermal decomposition was substantially impeded relative to poly(methyl methacrylate) as a control, which was due to the fire-resistant nature of the MDOS monomer. Molecular weight measurements indicate MDOS/MMA copolymers form substantially higher molecular weights as the proportion of MDOS increases. At a given radius of gyration, higher MDOS-containing copolymers exhibit higher molecular weights, suggesting a more compact structure with increasing MDOS.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

John Texter, Liehui Ge, Thomas H Mourey, Trevor G Bryan. 2004-12-21. Polymerizable bis(2-ethylhexyl)sulfosuccinate: application in microemulsion polymerization.. https://doi.org/10.1021/la0489357

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗