Influence of resin-coating agents on the roughness and color of composite resins

Rizzante, Fábio Antônio Piola; Bombonatti, Juliana Fraga Soares; Vasconcelos, Layla Reginna Silva Munhoz de; Porto, Thiago Soares; Teich, Sorin; Mondelli, R.

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.011

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many studies have suggested that conventional GICs result in high surface roughness values owing to the large particle sizes of their formulation. 25,26 Consistent with these studies, the higher Ra values of Fuji IX and Amalgomer CR before and after APF treatment can be attributed to their compositions consisting of large size particles. Besides, the size and shape of the filler particles as well as the composition of the material play an important role in the behaviour of restorative materials when exposed to topical fluoride applications.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…16 Moreover, it has been reported that the removal of only the resin matrix by finishing and polishing causes the filler particles to protrude from the surface, thereby increasing the surface roughness. 25,33 In a study, after finishing and polishing processes, a significant increase in surface roughness was found in Amalgomer CR. 27 Therefore, in this study, the decrease in surface roughness after APF application in the Amalgomer CR may be due to the chemical attack of APF on glass particles other than zirconium particles, which become prominent on the surface after finishing and polishing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various studies reported that finishing and polishing procedures deteriorated the smooth surfaces produced with Mylar strip. [25][26][27] Therefore, in light of these studies, the smoothing effects of surface coating may be more visible on the finished and polished surfaces. However, in this study, there was no significant difference in surface roughness between the group C and S of the compomer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Effect of Surface Coating Agent on the Surface Roughness of Restorative Materials Exposed to Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride

Bayrak¹,

Dosdoğru²,

Öztürk³

et al. 2021

Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The purpose of this study was to assess the surface roughness of six different restorative materials when covered with surface coating agent prior to 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride gel application. Materials and methods: Six restorative materials (Fuji IX, Amalgomer CR, Dyract XP, Beautifil II, ACTIVA, Filtek Z250) were used in this study. 28 specimens were prepared from each material and randomly divided into 4 groups (n=7) according to surface treatment regimens. Group C: control, no application, Group F: only acidulated phosphate fluoride gel application, Group S: only surface coating agent application, Group SF: acidulated phosphate fluoride gel application following the surface coating procedure. The surface roughness values for all specimens were measured using profilometer. The results were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Newman Keuls and Tukey's tests (p<0.05). Results: There were no statistically significant differences in surface roughness between group C and F for all analyzed materials, except for Amalgomer CR (p>0.05). The control group of Amalgomer CR showed greater surface roughness values than that of the group F (p=0.001). Group S produced significantly smoother surfaces than the group C for all restorative materials, except Dyract XP (p=0.001). Conclusion:1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride gel application did not promote a significant increase on the surface roughness of restorative materials whether or not surface coated. However, surface coating was found to produce smoother surfaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Surface Coating Agent on the Surface Roughness of Restorative Materials Exposed to Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride

Bayrak¹,

Dosdoğru²,

Öztürk³

et al. 2021

Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BLV had an acrylate monomer (dipentaerythritol pentaacrylate) and ethanol so that, the structure gains flexibility and moisture-resistance. 41 Moreover, a cross-linking material (PENTA-dipentaerythritol pentaacrylate monophosphate), which is frequently used in adhesive bonding systems, 42 is from the same phosphoric ester family of the acrylate monomer of BLV. It is therefore expected that the BLV material will be in accordance with monomer structures of tested resin composites and may form a barrier for foreign structures such as S. mutans .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of surface sealant on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of bulk-fill composites

Ozan

Eren

Vatansever

et al. 2021

Polymers and Polymer Composites

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface sealants are reported to ensure surface smoothness and improve the surface quality of composite restorations. These sealants should also reduce the bacterial adhesion on composite surfaces however, there is not much information regarding their performance on bulk-fill composite materials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface sealant application on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of various restorative materials. Disc-shaped samples were prepared from a compomer, a conventional composite and three bulk-fill composites. Specimens of each group were divided into two groups (n = 9): with/without surface sealant (Biscover LV, [BLV]). Surface roughness values were examined by profilometry and two samples of each group were examined for bacterial adhesion on a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Bacterial counts were calculated by both broth cultivation and microscopic images. Results were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni/Dunn tests. Following the BLV application, there was a decrease in the surface roughness values of all groups however, only Tetric N-Ceram Bulk and Beautifil-Bulk groups showed significantly smoother surfaces (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences among material groups without BLV application. Evaluating bacterial adhesion after BLV application, conventional composite had the lowest values among all followed by the compomer group. Beautifil-Bulk had significantly the highest bacterial adhesion (p < 0.05), followed by Tetric N-Ceram Bulk group. Without BLV application, there was no significant difference among bacterial adhesion values of groups (p > 0.05). CLSM images showed cell viability in groups. Bulk-fill composites showed higher bacterial adhesion than conventional composite and compomer materials. The surface sealant was found to be highly effective in lowering bacterial adhesion, but not so superior in smoothing the surfaces of restorative materials. So, surface sealants could be used on the restorations of patients with high caries risk.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the tip of the tongue is able to detect a surface roughness change of 0.3 μm, thus a smooth surface adds to the patient's comfort [25]. Furthermore, the final surface polish influences the aesthetics of composite restorations and contributes to the gloss meter [26] as well as a better color stability [27]. It is believed that smoothest surface is obtained when composite is polymerized against a matrix strip.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of air-polishing on surface roughness of composite dental restorative material – comparison of three different air-polishing powders

Janiszewska‐Olszowska

Droździk

Tandecka

et al. 2020

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Increased composite roughness enhances bacterial adhesion and discoloration, thus increasing the risk of gingival inflammation and secondary caries. Concerns about detrimental effects of sodium bicarbonate on surface roughness influenced the development of less abrasive powders: a glycine-based powder and an erythritolbased powder, additionally -sodium bicarbonate-based powder of reduced grain size. However, there is limited evidence on effects of these materials on the surface of dental fillings. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of three air-polishing powders (of a reduced abrasiveness) on surface roughness of microhybrid restorative composite material. Material and methods: Microhybrid light-cure resin composite samples were placed on 64 plaster cubes and light-cured through polyester strips. Surface roughness was measured using laser confocal microscope (magnification 2160x). The specimens were randomly divided into three groups (n = 20, 20 and 24) and airpolished with: sodium bicarbonate (40 μm), glycine (25 μm) and erythritol (14 μm), respectively. Then surface roughness was remeasured, keeping the same field of observation. Specialized 3D analysis software was used for data processing. Parameters according to ISO 25178: Sa, Sq, Sku, Sp, Sv, Sz, Ssk were used to describe surface roughness. Results: Sa, Sq, Sp, Sv, Sz increased significantly following air polishing. Ssk was significantly higher, whereas Sku was significantly lower in sodium bicarbonate and erythritol groups than before air polishing. Comparison between the three powders revealed that Sa was significantly higher in sodium bicarbonate group than in glycine group. Sku was significantly higher in glycine and erythritol groups than in sodium bicarbonate group. Conclusions: Sodium bicarbonate has a stronger detrimental effect on composite surface than glycine or erythritol. No advantage of erythritol comparing to glycine could be found.

show abstract

Influence of resin-coating agents on the roughness and color of composite resins

Cited by 15 publications

References 20 publications

The Effect of Surface Coating Agent on the Surface Roughness of Restorative Materials Exposed to Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride

The Effect of Surface Coating Agent on the Surface Roughness of Restorative Materials Exposed to Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride

Effect of surface sealant on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of bulk-fill composites

Effect of air-polishing on surface roughness of composite dental restorative material – comparison of three different air-polishing powders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About