The Effect of Different Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Gloss of Various Resin Composites
Authors:
- Juliana DA CostaJCJuliana DA Costa
- Jack FerracaneJFJack Ferracane
- Rade D. ParavinaRPRade D. Paravina
- Rui Fernando MazurRMRui Fernando Mazur
- Leslie RoederLRLeslie Roeder
- 17 July 2007
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
- Vol. 19 (4) , 214-224
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the surface finish and gloss of five direct resin composites polished with six polishing systems.Materials and Methods: One hundred and fifty disk‐shaped composite specimens (D=10.0 mm, 2‐mm‐thick, N=30 per material) were made. One side of each specimen was finished with a 16‐fluted carbide finishing bur and then polished. Five specimens of each resin composite were randomly assigned to one of the six polishing systems. The surface roughness and gloss were measured with a surface profilometer and a glossmeter. The results were analyzed by two‐way analysis of variance and Tukey’s t‐test (p≤ 0.05).Results: There was no significant interaction between the composite and the polishing systems for surface roughness (p=0.059). The order of surface roughness ranked according to composite was: Durafill < Esthet‐X < Supreme < Z250 < Z100; and the ranking for the polishing system was: Pogo < Sof‐Lex < Diacomp/Enamelize < Diacomp < ComposiPro brush < Jiffy. There was interaction of gloss values between the composites and the polishing systems (p < 0.001). The highest gloss value was recorded for Supreme + Pogo; the lowest was recorded for Z100 + Jiffy. Pogo showed the highest gloss values for all composites.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The nanofill (Supreme) and minifill (Esthet‐X) composites presented a surface roughness comparable to a microfill (Durafill), independent of the polishing system used, and a gloss comparable to a microfill, when polished with a one‐step system (Pogo). As compared with the multiple‐step systems, the smoothest surfaces and the highest gloss values were achieved using the one‐step system (Pogo) for all the evaluated composites.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effect of Polishing Techniques and Time on Surface Roughness, Hardness and Microleakage of Resin Composite RestorationsOperative Dentistry, 2006
- Surface Roughness of Nanofill and Nanohybrid Composite Resin and Ormocer-based Tooth-colored Restorative Materials after Several Finishing and Polishing ProceduresJournal of Biomaterials Applications, 2004
- The in vivo perception of roughness of restorationsBritish Dental Journal, 2004
- Effects of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface texture of resin compositesDental Materials, 1994
- Surface roughness of finished composite resinsThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1992
- Colour stability of composite resins: A clinical comparisonAustralian Dental Journal, 1992
- Effects of various finishing methods on staining and accumulation of Streptococcus mutans HS-6 on composite resinsDental Materials, 1985
- The Surface Roughness and Gloss of CompositesJournal of Dental Research, 1984
- The ability of foods to stain two composite resinsThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1980
- Influence of a composite resin restoration on the gingivaThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1972