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

Abstract

<jats:p>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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 0.001). The time to achieve a visible composite gloss was influenced by the polishing method, composite type, and interactions between these factors (p &lt; 0.001). The interface roughness was significantly greater than that of the composite surface (p &lt; 0.001), and depended on the composite type and polishing system employed.</jats:p>

Varying the Polishing Protocol Influences the Color Stability and Surface Roughness of Bulk-Fill Resin-Based Composites

“…The surface roughness was found to be mainly influenced by the type of resin composite, as stated above, but also by the polishing procedure used. This is in accordance with many previous findings [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Smoother surfaces were achieved with the experimental polishing protocols, when compared to the control group, where the samples were finished with an extra-fine bur.…”

Surface evaluations of a nanocomposite after different finishing and polishing systems for anterior and posterior restorations

“…The irregularity of the restoration surface could lead to staining, deterioration, and a reduced efficiency of oral hygiene procedures, hence promoting an increased plaque accumulation and the onset of a secondary caries (Sparabombe et al, 2018). Indeed, F/P procedures are crucial clinical steps to restore the correct anatomical and morphological tooth shape and to provide better optical properties (Antonson et al, 2011;Babina et al, 2020;da Costa et al, 2011). In both anterior and posterior teeth, there are various F/P systems available on the market and the effects of these systems depend on the materials with which they were made and the type of resin composite to be polished (Monterubbianesi et al, 2020 Thomas, 1990), whereas, according to the American Dental Association (ADA), a typically desired gloss surface corresponds to 40-60 GU (ADA Professional Product Review, 2010).…”

Influence of different polishing and aging periods on the surface roughness of composite resins

“…The aesthetic aspect of CR is achieved based on the shape, the final color, the surface smoothness and the gloss of the restorations obtained by the procedures of finishing, polishing, keepingthe polished surface for a long period in the oral environment (Freitas et al, 2020;Schmitt et al, 2011;Tuncer, Karaman, & Firat, 2013). A perfectly polished surface prevents the retention of biofilm, the formation of early superficial marginal discoloration, gingival irritation, and reduces the risk of developing secondary caries due to the absence of micro-roughness (Babina et al, 2020;da Silva, da Rocha, Travassos, Fernandes, & Rodrigues, 2010;Schmitt et al, 2011;Soliman et al, 2020;Tuncer et al, 2013).…”

“…Some reports in the literature correlate early restoration failures and marginal defects from the finishing and polishing process (Hassan, Nabih, Mossa, & Baroudi, 2015). This occurs, since these are affected by the technique and time of polishing, in addition to being sensitive to the characteristics and composition of the material (Babina et al, 2020;Hassan et al, 2015).…”

“…This topic is still remains a controversial topic (Opdam et al, 2014;Schmitt et al, 2011). Polishing at the wrong time can affect physical properties, causing irreversible damage and failure in restorations (Babina et al, 2020;Hassan et al, 2015;Yap, Yap, Teo, & Ng, 2004).…”