Influence of polishing duration on surface roughness of resin composites

There is a need for effective polishing instruments for resin composite restorations with highly polished surfaces. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of polishing duration on surface roughness of light-cured resin composites. Four polishing systems, Compomaster (Shofu), Silicone Points C Type (Shofu), Super Snap (Shofu) and Enhance Finishing and Polishing System (Dentsply/Caulk), were used to polish two commercially available resin composites, Clearfil AP-X (Kuraray Medical) and Lite-Fil II A (Shofu). Resin pastes were condensed into molds (10 mm in diameter, 5 mm in depth) and light irradiated for 40 s. Composite surfaces were ground with # 600 SiC paper followed by polishing with an instrument for 30 s, and the surface roughness was measured every 10 s during polishing procedures. The average surface roughnesses (Ra) were determined using a profilometer. Data were analyzed by Tukey HSD test (P = 0.05). After 30 s of polishing, mean Ra values ranged from 0.07 to 0.50 for Clearfil AP-X, and from 0.11 to 0.57 for Lite-Fil II A. Although the time required for polishing was longer, the surface finish produced by multiple-step polishing systems was superior to that obtained with one-step polishing systems.     

Effects of polishing on surface roughness, gloss, and color of resin composites

This study evaluated the effects of polishing on surface roughness, gloss, and color of regular, opaque, and enamel shades for each of three resin composites. Two-mm-thick resin disks made with Estelite Σ Quick, Clearfil Majesty, and Beautifil II were final polished with 180-, 1000-, and 3000-grit silicon carbide paper. Surface roughness, gloss, and color were measured one week after curing. Estelite Σ Quick had significantly lower roughness values and significantly higher gloss values as compared with Clearfil Majesty and Beautifil II. The effects of surface roughness and gloss on color (L*a*b*) differed among resin composites and by shade. Correlation coefficients between surface roughness and L*a*b* color factors were generally high for Clearfil Majesty, partially high (i.e., between roughness and L*) for Beautifil II, and low for Estelite Σ Quick. Correlation coefficients between gloss and L*a*b* color parameters were generally high for Beautifil II and low for Estelite Σ Quick and Clearfil Majesty. However, for all resin composites, the values of the color differences between 3000-grit and 180-grit polishing groups for all shades were imperceptible by the naked eye.     

Surface finish produced on three resin composites by new polishing systems

This study evaluated the surface finish of three direct resin composites polished with three different systems. Disk-shaped specimens (n=16 per material; phi=8.0 mm x h=2.0 mm) were formed in a stainless steel mold by packing uncured material, either a hybrid composite (Z250, 3M ESPE) or two micro-hybrid composites (Point 4, Kerr; Esthet-X, Dentsply), and light-cured from the top and the bottom surfaces with a light-emitting diode (LED) curing unit (NRG, Dentsply). After storing the specimens in deionized water at 37 degrees C for seven days, one side of each specimen was finished through 1200-grit SiC abrasive (Buehler). Five specimens of each resin composite were randomly assigned to one of the three polishing systems (Identoflex, Kerr; Pogo, Dentsply; Sof-Lex, 3M ESPE). Manufacturers' instructions were followed during the polishing procedures. The average surface roughness (Ra) was determined by generating tracings across the polished surface of each disk using a scanning profilometer (Surfanalyzer System 5000, Federal Products Co). The results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann and Whitney tests (p < or = 0.05). The smoothest surfaces were produced with the celluloid strip (control group) on all the resin composites tested. The aluminum oxide disks (Sof-Lex) produced a statistically equivalent surface finish (Ra) on the three resin composites. The lowest mean roughness values were recorded with diamond micropolisher disks (PoGo) on the hybrid composite (Z250). Overall, the two new polishing systems, Identoflex and PoGo, created a comparable surface finish to that produced by the Sof-Lex system on all three resin composites.     

Surface finish produced on resin composites by new polishing systems.

OBJECTIVE: There is a demand for more efficient and finer polishing of resin composite restorations. This study compared the use of some new systems, with new or reduced numbers of abrasive instruments, to polish representative resin composites. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Super-Snap Rainbow Technique Kit, Sof-Lex Pop-On System, and Enhance Finishing and Polishing System were used to prepare the surfaces of blocks of seven different hybrid or microfilled resin composites. For each system, three instruments were used for 30 seconds each in a standard manner. The average surface roughness of the polished surfaces was determined by profilometer. RESULTS: Visually, all surfaces were of clinically acceptable luster. By profilometer ranking, the Super-Snap Rainbow Kit produced the smoothest surfaces, followed by the Sof-Lex Pop-On System disks (which were not statistically different), and the Enhance System. CONCLUSION: The Super-Snap Rainbow Technique Kit and Sof-Lex Pop-On System provided the smoothest surfaces for all the composites tested. For several composites, the Enhance System provided less smooth surfaces, but these were also clinically acceptable.     

3种抛光方法对树脂表面粗糙度影响的比较

目的通过定性与定量分析比较3种抛光方法对3种不同树脂表面粗糙度的影响。方法将3种不同类型的树脂制作成15个直径为5mm,厚度为3mm的圆柱本样本,随机分为3组：Sof—Lex抛光碟组．Brilliant Gloss橡皮抛光尖组,One Gloss橡皮抛光尖组。抛光后用轮廓测定仪在样本测试面中心区测表面粗糙度（Ra）,然后每个小组中随机选取1个样本,采用原子力显微镜观察其表面微观形貌。结果Sof-Lex、One Gloss抛光后,3种不同树脂的Ra均值差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）、单因素方差分析结果显示材料组之间、抛光方法组之间Ra均值差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）,且组内两两比较结果显示同种树脂3种抛光方法之间Ra均值差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）：多因素方差分析结果显示材料类型和抛光方法均会影响树脂表面粗糙度,二者具有明显交互作用（P〈0．01）原子力显微镜观察结果显示Sof-Lex和BrilliantGloss抛光后树脂表面相对均一,OneGloss抛光后树脂表面有划痕、空穴、填料颗粒突出等结构。结论3种树脂之间、3种不同抛光方法之间Ra均值差异均存在统计学患义,抛光效果具有材料依赖性。     

Effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites

Purpose : This study was undertaken to examine the effect of three different polishing systems on surface roughness of five newly developed resin composites.
Materials and Methods : Three microhybrid composites (Point 4™, Kerr, Orange, CA; Esthet-X™, Dentsply/Caulk, Milford, DE; Vitalescence®, Ultradent, South Jordan, UT, USA), one microfilled composite (Renamel Microfill®, Cosmedent, Chicago, IL, USA), and one experimental micro-hybrid composite (FZB, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) were light cured with a Mylar strip. Fifteen specimens of each composite (6 mm in diameter and 3 mm in depth) were fabricated and randomly assigned to three groups. Specimens in each group were finished with a carbide bur (16 fluted) and three polishing systems (Astropol®, Ivoclar Vivadent; Diagloss®, Axis Dental, Irving, TX, USA; Sof-Lex™, 3M, ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA). The average surface roughness (Ra) and the mean peak spacing (Sm) were measured with a surface profilometer after polishing. Five tracings at different locations on each specimen were made. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance.
Results : For Astropol, Ra ranged from 0.10 to 0.15 um and Sm ranged from 24 to 40 um for the five composites; for Diagloss, Ra ranged from 0.24 to 0.34 um and Sm from 38 to 74 urn; for Sof-Lex, Ra ranged from 0.06 to 0.10 um and Sm ranged from 16 to 22 um. Significant differences between materials and polishing systems were observed. Polishing systems had the most important role in determining the surface roughness of resin composites.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Of the polished systems tested, Sof-Lex discs provided the lowest roughness for polishing microfilled and microhybrid composites, and the microfilied resin composite showed the lowest roughness.     

Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of packable composites

This study examined the average surface roughness (Ra, micron) of three packable composites and one hybrid composite cured against mylar, before and after treatment with a fine finishing diamond bur, a resin finisher followed by fine and extrafine polishing paste, two silicone-based finishing and polishing systems, fine and super-fine aluminum-oxide polishing disks, a silicon carbide-impregnated polishing brush and a surface-penetrating composite sealant. Additionally, the Ra was examined for one of the packable composites before and after treatment with a finishing carbide, prior to the finishing and polishing procedures detailed above. The finishing diamond significantly increased the Ra for all composites (ALERT, SureFil, Solitaire and Z-100). The finishing carbide used with SureFil (SureFil + C) also increased the Ra; however, it also produced surfaces up to 3.5x smoother when compared to SureFil surfaces finished with the diamond. Overall, Sof-Lex Contouring and Polishing Discs were able to produce the smoothest surfaces, followed by the Jiffy Composite Polishing Cups, the Enhance Composite Finishing & Polishing System/Prisma-Gloss Composite Polishing Paste, the Diacomp Intra-Oral Composite Polishers and the Jiffy Composite Polishing Brushes, respectively. The smoothest surfaces were produced using Z-100, followed by SureFil + C (carbide finishing bur), Solitaire, SureFil and ALERT, respectively. In general, Protect-It Composite Surface Sealant had little effect on the Ra, except with ALERT, where a slight increase in Ra was observed.     

Influence of polishing instruments on the surface texture of resin composites.

OBJECTIVE: There is a need for an ideal polishing system for resin composite restorations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of polishing instruments on the surface texture of light-cured resin composites. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four polishing systems-Compomaster (Shofu), Silicone Points C Type (Shofu), Super-Snap (Shofu), and Enhance Finishing and Polishing System (Dentsply/DeTrey)-were used to polish the flat surface of cylindrical blocks made of 3 different resin composites: Beautifil (Shofu), Clearfil AP-X (Kuraray Medical), and Lite-Fil II A (Shofu). The average surface roughness (Ra) and surface gloss (Gs60 degrees) were determined. Scanning electron microscopic observations of the polished specimens were made. The polished samples were immersed in a 0.3% acid rhodamine B solution for 1 week, and change in color was determined. RESULTS: The multiple-step systems, Enhance and Super-Snap, resulted in the best surface finishes. A new single-step point, Compomaster, ranked third in surface finish but was significantly better than the older point system, Silicone Points C. The color-staining experiments showed that there were no significant differences between the Compomaster system and the multiple-step systems, which were all significantly better than the older polishing point. CONCLUSION: The newly introduced 1-step polishing point has the ability to polish resin composites as effectively as multistep polishing systems.     

The effect of different polishing techniques on the surface roughness of acrylic resin materials

This study evaluated three methods of surface polishing on acrylic denture base materials. Specimens of three commercial heat-cured acrylic resin materials were finished using burs, sandpaper discs and rubber wheels, and polished with polishing soap, paste, or by application of a UV-light-activated resin sealant. The resulting surface roughness was examined by scanning electron microscopy as well as measured by means of a stylus profile Perthometer. Surface roughness was reduced by polishing. Polishing paste and UV-light-activated resin sealant were more, and equally, effective in reducing surface roughness compared to polishing soap. Polishing paste or UV-light-activated resin sealant may be used to create a smoother surface on acrylic dentures.     

The effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of composite resin materials

AIMS: The aims of this study were to evaluate the effect of various finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of six different composite resin materials (Artemis Enamel, TPH Spectrum, Filtek A-110, Filtek Supreme Enamel, Solitaire 2, and Filtek P-60) as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the surface sealant application (BisCover) on the surface roughness after finishing and polishing procedures of tested composites. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Specimens (n=168) measuring 5 mm in diameter x 2 mm in thickness were fabricated in a plexiglass well covered with a Mylar strip using six composite resins. A control group of seven specimens of each material received no polishing after being cured under the Mylar strip. Twenty-one specimens for each composite were randomly divided among three finishing and polishing groups (n=7). Each group was polished using a different system: Carbide bur/Sof-Lex disc, Carbide bur/Enhance disc with polishing paste, and Carbide bur/Edenta composite finishing kit. The average surface roughness (Ra, microm) of the control and treated specimens were measured with the Mitutoyo Surftest-402 Surface Roughness tester. After a surface sealant (BisCover) was applied to all treated specimens, according to manufacturer's instructions, the average roughness (Ra) was measured again. Results were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the post-hoc Scheffe's test at a p<0.05 significance level. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for the surface roughness (p<0.05) with interaction among composite resins and the finishing systems used (p<0.05). Enhance/Biscover finishing and polishing procedure surface was not significantly different from the Mylar strip surface groups (p>0.05). The Mylar strip group was not significantly different from the Sof-Lex/BisCover and Edenta/BisCover groups. The ranking of mean Ra values by materials was as follows: Filtek Supreme Enamel < Filtek A110 < TPH Spectrum < Artemis 相似文献   

冷光漂白对光固化复合树脂表面微硬度和表面粗糙度的影响

目的:研究冷光漂白对4种光固化复合树脂表面微硬度和表面粗糙度的影响。方法:取临床常用的4种复合树脂(Gradia Direct、Z350XT、Premisa、Précis),分别制备成直径10 mm,厚2 mm的圆片状试件。从每种试件中各取20个试件,将其各随机分成两组(n=10),实验组接受冷光漂白处理,另一组不作任何处理,置于蒸馏水中作为对照;漂白处理结束后,用显微显微硬度计检测各组各试件的表面微硬度。然后再分别从每种树脂试件中各取3个试件,分别在冷光漂白处理前和处理后用原子力显微镜(AFM)对各试件表面进行扫描,检测其表面粗糙度。用SPSS 19.0统计软件对数据(±s)进行统计分析。结果:4种树脂试件经冷光漂白处理后表面微硬度值均较其对照组明显降低(P<0.05);冷光漂白后,各试件的表面粗糙度值均明显变大(P<0.05)。结论:冷光漂白处理可降低复合树脂的表面微硬度,并使其表面粗糙度增大。     

温度循环老化对复合树脂表面粗糙度的影响

目的 了解复合树脂经温度循环老化作用后表面粗糙度的变化,分析复合树脂组成成分和工艺对其表面粗糙度的影响,为临床选择和应用复合树脂材料提供指导.方法 选用复合树脂A(Clearfil AP-X,Kurary)、B(Filtek P60,3M ESPE)、C(Filtek P90,3M ESPE)和D(Clearfil MAJESTY,Kurary)制成试样,每组5个样本,在抛光即刻和经10000次及20000次温度循环(55℃和5℃,30s)处理后,用表面粗糙度仪检测试样,获得表面粗糙度Ra值,并进行统计学分析.结果 抛光即刻树脂A的Ra值[(0.16±0.03)μm]显著高于树脂B[(0.09±0.01)μm]、树脂C[(0.09±0.02)μm]和树脂D[(0.08±0.02)μm](P＜0.05),树脂B、C、D的Ra值差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);4种树脂在温度循环10 000次后的Ra值均无变化(P ＞0.05);20 000次温度循环后,树脂A的Ra值显著增高[(0.20±0.02) μm]较抛光后即刻[(0.16±0.03)μm]和10000次温度循环后[(0.17±0.03) μm]显著增高(P＜0.05),其他3种树脂Ra值仍无显著变化(P＞0.05).结论 短期温度循环老化作用不会导致复合树脂表面粗糙度变化,延长老化时间后大颗粒玻璃填料树脂表面粗糙度增加;纳米工艺可显著改善树脂表面粗糙度;新型硅氧烷类树脂的表面粗糙性表现良好.