The effects of irradiance and exposure time on the surface roughness of bulk-fill composite resin restorative materials

Effect of different finishing and polishing systems on surface properties of universal single shade resin-based composites

BACKGROUND

Recently, universal single-shade resin composites have become increasingly available in the dental market. The modification of their composition can have an inadvertent effect on their physical and surface properties, and subsequently determinantal effect on their clinical function and longevity. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of different finishing and polishing (F/P) systems on surface roughness (Ra), surface gloss (GU), and Vickers microhardness (VMH) of universal single-shade RBCs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four commercial RBCs were used; the universal single-shade RBCs were Omnichroma, Charisma® Diamond ONE, and Vittra APS Unique, and a conventional nanocomposite Filtek™ Z250 XT was used as a control. The 3 F/P systems were Sof-Lex™ XT, Enhance®/PoGo®, and Diacomp® Plus Twist. A total of 160 discs were used for the 3 F/P system groups for all RBCs (n = 10). After F/P, the Ra, GU, and VMH were assessed. The data were analyzed using 2-way ANOVA at p-value < 0.05.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found among the four RBCs and the 3 F/P systems (p < .000). Omnichroma showed the lowest Ra and acceptable GU, but the lowest VMH. Charisma showed the highest Ra, acceptable GU, and VMH. Vittra showed acceptable Ra, GU, and VMH and Filtek showed the highest GU, VMH, and acceptable Ra.

CONCLUSION

Although conventional nanohybrid RBC (Filtek Z250 XT) showed better GU and VMH values, the universal single-shade RBCs demonstrated comparable surface properties. The highest GU & VMH and lowest Ra were achieved by Diacomp followed by Enhance and Soflex.

The Effect of Finishing and Polishing Sequences on The Surface Roughness of Three Different Nanocomposites and Composite/Enamel and Composite/Cementum Interfaces

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of final surface treatment and dental composite type on the roughness of the composite surface, composite/enamel interface, and composite/cementum interface, as well as on the polishing time. Class V cavities prepared in extracted teeth (n = 126) were restored using one of the three nanohybrid composites with different filler sizes. The specimens were randomly assigned to three different finishing and polishing sequences. The roughness (Ra) of the investigated surfaces was measured using the contact profilometer. The time required to achieve visible gloss was documented. The data were analyzed using ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test (p < 0.05). There was no significant influence of the composite type on the restoration surface roughness (p = 0.088), while the polishing method had a significant impact (p < 0.001). The Ra of the composites ranged between 0.08 µm and 0.29 µm, with the lowest values (0.09 µm ± 0.05 µm) found in the aluminum oxide disc group (p < 0.001). The time to achieve a visible composite gloss was influenced by the polishing method, composite type, and interactions between these factors (p < 0.001). The interface roughness was significantly greater than that of the composite surface (p < 0.001), and depended on the composite type and polishing system employed.