Effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites

Abstract

The use of composite resins in dentistry is well accepted for restoring anterior and posterior teeth. Many polishing protocols have been evaluated for their effect on the surface roughness of restorative materials. This study compared the effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites. Thirty-six specimens were prepared for each composite [Charisma® (Heraeus Kulzer), Fill Magic® (Vigodent), TPH Spectrum® (Dentsply), Z100® (3M/ESPE) and Z250® (3M/ESPE)] and submitted to surface treatment with Enhance® and PoGo® (Dentsply) points, sequential Sof-Lex XT® aluminum oxide disks (3M/ESPE), and felt disks (TDV) combined with Excel® diamond polishing paste (TDV). Average surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a mechanical roughness tester. The data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA with repetition of the factorial design and the Tukey-Kramer test (p<0.01). The F-test result for treatments and resins was high (p<0.0001 for both), indicating that the effect of the treatment applied to the specimen surface and the effect of the type of resin on surface roughness was highly significant. Regarding the interaction between polishing system and type of resin used, a p value of 0.0002 was obtained, indicating a statistically significant difference. A Ra of 1.3663 was obtained for the Sof-Lex/TPH Spectrum interaction. In contrast, the Ra for the felt disk+paste/Z250 interactions was 0.1846. In conclusion, Sof-Lex polishing system produced a higher surface roughness on TPH Spectrum resin when compared to the other interactions.

Comparison of Two-Step Versus Four-Step Composite Finishing/Polishing Disc Systems: Evaluation of a New Two-Step Composite Polishing Disc System

“…[10][11][12][13]16,18,21 To the best of the authors' knowledge, no studies have compared the two four-step systems or the three systems that were evaluated in this study.…”

“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] A great majority of discs are impregnated with aluminum oxide; however, silicon carbide, garnet, emery, and quartz can also be present. F/P discs are utilized in a sequence ranging from the coarsest grits of 55-100 lm to the finest grits of 7-8 lm.…”

Comparison of One-Step and Multistep Polishing Systems for the Surface Roughness of Resin Composites

“…Microfilled composites are used for esthetic restorations because their filler size provides higher polishability than conventional composites containing large filler particles [12] [24]. The application of nanotechnology to composite research is of great benefit [25].…”

SEM and AFM characterization of surface of two RMGICs for degradation before and after modification with bioactive glass ceramic

“…[26,34] This can be observed in SEM images as is shown in Figures: 3A, 3B, 4A and 4B.The differences in the surface nanoroughness of these RMGICs might be ascribed to the 11 variation in their filler size. Smaller particles provide less vertical dimension and facilitate the adhesion to the resin matrix, thus providing a smoother surfaces [35,36].…”