The Effect of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Different Composite Restorative Materials

Üçtaşli, Mine Betül; Arısu, Hacer Deniz; Ömürlü, Hüma; Eligüzeloğlu, Evrim; Özcan, Suat; Ergün, Gülfem

doi:10.5005/jcdp-8-2-89

Cited by 33 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surface roughness, given as the roughness value—Ra, does not present sufficient information about gloss or tooth appearance after wetting, because subjective feelings depend on many other factors [ 15 ]. This value however corresponds with smoothness which is responsible for dental plaque accumulation, discoloration of material surface and as a consequence risk of secondary caries, and inflammation of marginal gingiva [ 4 , 5 , 8 – 12 , 16 , 17 ]. Bollen et al proved that surface roughness at the level 0.2 μ m is sufficient to reduce adhesion of bacteria to the filling surface [ 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface Geometry of Four Conventional Nanohybrid Resin-Based Composites and Four Regular Viscosity Bulk Fill Resin-Based Composites after Two-Step Polishing Procedure

Granat

Cieloszyk

Kowalska

et al. 2020

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. The aim of the study was to determine the quantitative and qualitative surface structure of contemporary RBCs in posterior teeth reconstructions: regular viscosity bulk fill and conventional composites, obtained after two-stage polishing procedure. Materials and Methods. Four conventional nanohybrid composites (Tetric EvoCeram, GrandioSO, Filtek Z550, and Ceram·X Mono) and four regular viscosity bulk fill composites (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, X-tra fil, Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior, and QuixFil) were tested. Samples of each RBC were prepared using PMMA cylindrical mold. After two-step polishing procedure, a surface geometry was evaluated under profilometry (Turbowave v. 7.36, Hommel-Etamic) and SEM (VEGA 3, Tescan Analytics). To evaluate differences between values, the following nonparametric tests were used: Friedman’s ANOVA, Wilcoxon’s matched-pair test, ANOVA Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U. Results. All conventional RBCs showed Ra values in the range of 0.20-0.26 μm. Bulk fill showed higher values in range of 0.49-1.36 μm except for Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior, which achieved 0.23 μm Ra value. SEM images of conventional RBCs were described as smooth surfaces with slight damage except for TEC, which presented smooth surface with no damage. Bulk fill composites showed rough surface, except for TBF, which presented smooth surface with slight damage. Conclusions. Regular viscosity bulk fill composites do not constitute a homogeneous group regarding surface roughness after polishing. They obtain, for the most part, poorer smoothness values after polishing than conventional RBCs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface Geometry of Four Conventional Nanohybrid Resin-Based Composites and Four Regular Viscosity Bulk Fill Resin-Based Composites after Two-Step Polishing Procedure

Granat

Cieloszyk

Kowalska

et al. 2020

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The variations in color stability observed among the tested materials could also be attributed to the differences in filler/resin ratio (Table 1 ). Previous studies have reported that resin composites with a low filler/resin ratio, which often corresponds to a lower viscosity, may exhibit reduced polishability and color stability [ 31 – 33 ]. Moreover, the observed color change can also be attributed to the silane agent used.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative assessment of color stability among various commercial resin composites

Uctasli,

Garoushi,

Uctasli

et al. 2023

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The aim was to evaluate the color stability of six commercial restorative resin composites after being exposed to commonly consumed beverages. Repolishing impact on the stained composite was also assessed. Methods One-hundred and fifty disc specimens (8 mm diameter & 3 mm thickness) were prepared from Filtek™ Universal Restorative, SDR flow+, everX Flow, G-ænial A’CHORD, G-ænial Universal Flo and G-ænial Universal Injectable. To assess the color stability in five various beverages, 25 specimens from each material were randomly distributed into five groups (n = 5), according to the utilized staining solution. Group 1: distilled water, Group 2: coffee, Group 3: red wine, Group 4: energy drink, Group 5: coke. The color changes (∆E) for all materials were measured using spectrophotometer at the baseline, after 84 days of staining and after repolishing. Data was collected and analyzed using ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results Both material type and staining solution had a significant effect on the color stability of specimens (p < 0.05). Compared to other beverages, the color value of the specimens submerged in coffee and wine showed the most statistically significant (p < 0.05) mean ∆E. SDR flow + in coffee and wine presented the highest ∆E when compared to other tested materials (p < 0.05). After staining of the composites, repolishing was successful in lowering the ∆E value. Conclusions All the beverages had an impact on the color stability of the tested resin composites, with coffee and wine demonstrating the most significant effects. The variations in color stability varied depending on the specific material utilized. Dentists should possess awareness regarding the chemical interactions that occur between different beverages and various types of resin composites. Additionally, repolishing serves as an effective technique for eliminating surface discoloration in composite restorations.

show abstract

“…According to previous studies, this finishing and polishing system had been considered to be the most efficient when comparing to other systems [18]. During finishing procedure the resin matrix is initially removed due to its lower hardness while the filling particles are exposed and subsequently dislocated from the resin matrix, thus increasing the surface roughness [19,20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A series of studies which evaluated the surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing procedure had concluded that the degree of material finishability depends on two factors: the size of the filling particles of the composite resin and the size of abrasive particles of the finishing system [19,20]. In this study, we tested microhybrid composite resins composed of zirconium/silicium and barium/silicium particles with dimensions between 0.01-3.5 µm and nanohybrid composite resins based on zirconium/silicium, barium glass fillers and silicon dioxide particles with dimensions between 20-50 nm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro Evaluation of Gastric Acid and Toothbrushing Effect on the Surface State of Different Types of Composite Resins

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of gastric acid associated with the effect of toothbrushing on the surface roughness of different types of composite resin used for direct restorations. Materials and Methods: The materials used in this study were two microhybrid (Filtek Z250, Herculite XRV) and two nanohybrid (Filtek Z550, Herculite XRV Ultra) composite resins. Two hundred and forty cylindrical samples with a height of 2 mm and a diameter of 6 mm were divided into four groups (groups A, B, C and D) corresponding to each tested material (n = 60). Each group was divided in two subgroups: subgroup I—the samples were submersed in hydrochloric acid and immediately submitted to toothbrushing; subgroup II—the samples were submitted only to toothbrushing. The simulation of the acid attack was performed by immersing the samples in a 0.01 M hydrochloric acid solution for 90 min. This procedure was followed immediately by toothbrushing simulation with 10,000 cycles. The acid attack and toothbrushing simulation were performed for two times. The surface roughness evaluation was performed with a Proscan 2100 profilometer. Repeated Measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to perform the statistical analysis. Results: Simulation of one year of toothbrushing associated or not to hydrochloric acid exposure increases the surface roughness of microhybrid and nanohybrid composite resins. Six months of toothbrushing associated to six months of hydrochloric acid exposure increase the surface roughness of nanohybrid composite resins. Conclusions: Microhybrid composite resins surface becomes rougher after toothbrush and acid submersion when comparing to nanohybrid composite resins.

show abstract

The Effect of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Different Composite Restorative Materials

Cited by 33 publications

References 29 publications

Surface Geometry of Four Conventional Nanohybrid Resin-Based Composites and Four Regular Viscosity Bulk Fill Resin-Based Composites after Two-Step Polishing Procedure

Surface Geometry of Four Conventional Nanohybrid Resin-Based Composites and Four Regular Viscosity Bulk Fill Resin-Based Composites after Two-Step Polishing Procedure

A comparative assessment of color stability among various commercial resin composites

In Vitro Evaluation of Gastric Acid and Toothbrushing Effect on the Surface State of Different Types of Composite Resins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About