The Effect of Various Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Two Resin Composites—An In Vitro Study
Source abstract
Abstract
The long-term success of a composite restoration largely depends on its smoothness, which can be achieved by the appropriate polishing tools and material selection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of two composite materials after the application of selected polishing systems. Filtek Ultimate (FU) and Filtek Z250 (FZ) were tested. Forty specimens of each material were prepared. After polymerization under a Mylar strip, the surface roughness of five samples from each group was measured. Subsequently, all specimens were ground by 600 grit sandpaper. The surface roughness of five samples per group was tested again. The samples from each group were randomly assigned to eight subgroups, and polished by Sof-Lex, Sof-Lex Diamond Polishing System, Super Snap, One Gloss, Astrobrush, Stainbuster, Enamel Shiny, and Jiffy Polishing System. The collected data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk and Kruskal–Wallis tests. The lowest Ra coefficient after polishing is found in the Super Snap groups (FU—0.077 μm, FZ—0.085 μm). The lowest Rlr coefficient is measured in the Enamel Shiny group for FU (1.000), and for Sof-Lex, Sof-Lex Diamond Polishing System, and Jiffy Polishing Kit for FZ (1.001), and only slightly higher for Super Snap (FU—1.001, FZ—1.002). The roughest-measured surface is in the One Gloss group for FU (Ra—0.657 µm, Rlr—1.009), and Astrobrush group for FZ (Ra—0.525 μm, Rlr—0.011). Additionally, it was not confirmed that the nanoparticle material (FU) demonstrates better results than the microhybrid one (FZ). Different polishing systems produce varying surface roughness. The most effective polishing system is Super Snap. The structure of composites does not significantly affect their surface roughness after polishing.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments · Dental Erosion and Treatment
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Medical University of Łódź, 90-647 Łódź, Poland
University Laboratory of Materials Research, Medical University of Łódź, 90-647 Łódź, Poland
Funding
the Polish Ministry of Science and Higer Education and by Medical University in Łódź
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Evaluation of Surface Roughness, Hardness, and Gloss of Composites After Three Different Finishing and Polishing Techniques: An In Vitro Study
2. Plaque accumulation on composite surfaces after various finishing procedures10.14219/jada.archive.1975.0294 ↗
3. Effects of Four Prophylaxis Pastes on Surface Roughness of a Composite, a Hybrid Ionomer, and a Compomer Restorative Material10.1111/j.1708-8240.2002.tb00170.x ↗
4. Assessment of the surface of composite materials after the use of selected polishing systems
5. Effect of Different Finishing Times on Surface Roughness and Maintenance of Polish in Nanoparticle and Microhybrid Composite Resins
6. Effect of Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Microhybrid Composites10.1111/j.1708-8240.2003.tb00300.x ↗
7. Effects of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface texture of resin composites10.1016/0109-5641(94)90041-8 ↗
8. Relation of finish to discoloration of composite resins10.1016/S0022-3913(84)80010-4 ↗
9. Effect of finishing/polishing techniques and time on surface roughness of silorane and methacrylate based restorative materials
10. Effects of Wet and Dry Finishing and Polishing on Surface Roughness and Microhardness of Composite Resins
11. The influence of titanium abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and gingivitis: Short-term observations
12. Effect of Various Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness of Nanohybrid and Microhybrid Composites
13. Effect of different finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness of resin composite and enamel: An In vitro profilometric and scanning electron microscopy study10.4103/ijabmr.IJABMR_11_19 ↗
14. Effect of Different Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness and Gloss of Novel Nanohybrid Resin Composites
15. Surface Roughness of a nanocomposite after finishing with different polishing systems—A two dimensional profilometric evaluation. International
16. Evaluation of the roughness of composite resins submitted to different surface treatments
17. Effect of Finishing/Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Novel Posterior Composites10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00324.x ↗
18. Freitas, F., de Melo, T.P., Delgdo, A., Monteiro, P., Rua, J., Proenca, L., Cardeila, J., Azul, A.M., and Mendes, J.J. (2021). Varying the Polishing Protocol Influences the Color Stability and Surface Roughness of Bulk-Fill Resin-Based Composites. J. Funct. Biomater., 12.10.3390/jfb12010001 ↗
19. Paolone, G., Moratti, E., Goracci, C., Gherlone, E., and Vichi, A. (2020). Effect of Finishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Gloss of Full-Body Bulk-Fill Resin Composites. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13245657 ↗
20. Evaluation of the effect of surface polishing, oral beverages and food colorants on color stability and surface roughness of nanocomposite resins
21. Surface Roughness, Microhardness, and Microleakage of a Silorane-Based Composite Resin after Immediate or Delayed Finishing/Polishing
22. Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of the packable composites
23. Composite surface after finishing and polishing techniques
24. Summit, J.B., Robbins, J.W., and Schwartz, R.S. (2002). Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach, Quintessence. [2nd ed.].
25. Craig, R.G., and Powers, J.M. (2002). Restorative Dental Materials, Mosby. [11th ed.].
26. The physical properties of packable and conventional pposterior resin-based composites: A comparison10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0091 ↗
27. Aesthetic Anterior Composite Restorations: A Guide to Direct Placement
28. Effect of finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins
29. The influence of finishing/polishing time and cooling system on surface roughness and microhardness of two different types of composite resin restorations10.4103/2231-0762.146211 ↗
30. In vitro evaluation of the effect of two finishing and polishing systems on four esthetic restorative materials10.4103/0972-0707.120946 ↗
31. Evaluation of surface roughness of different restorative composites after polishing using atomic force microscopy10.4103/0972-0707.173200 ↗
32. Roughness variation of a nanohybrid composite resin submitted to acid and abrasive challenges
33. Effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness of nanohybrid composites10.4103/0972-0707.173192 ↗
34. Surface roughness of various packable composites
35. Current concepts in polishing composite resins
36. The effects of polishing techniques on surface roughness and gloss of different composites
37. Effect of Additional Polishing Application on the Surface Roughness and Color Change of Composite Resins
38. Surface roughness of one nanofill and one silorane composite after polishing
39. Effect of finishing/polishing techniques and time on surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials10.4103/1735-3327.215962 ↗
40. Method for finishing composite restorative materials10.14219/jada.archive.1971.0311 ↗
41. Can reduced-step polishers be as effective as multiple-step polishers in enchancing surface smoothness?10.1111/jerd.12233 ↗
42. Surface roughness evaluation of resin modified glass–ionomers polished utilizing poly(acrylic acid) gel