SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Meandros Medical And Dental Journal / 2026 / Volume: 27 Issue: 2

Effects of Different Surface Finishing Processes on the Surface Roughness of Hybrid CAD/CAM Materials

Farklı Yüzey Bitirme İşlemlerinin Hibrit CAD/CAM Materyallerin Yüzey Pürüzlülüğü Üzerindeki Etkileri

Tevfik Yavuz(ETH Dental Clinic, Department of Prosthodontics)0000-0001-9507-4552
Betül Yılmaz Evmek(Creative Smiles Turkey Dental Clinic Department of Prosthodontics)0000-0002-6975-5183
Erhan Dilber(Alaaddin Keykubat üniversitesi Diş hekimliği fakültesi)0009-0003-2209-1070
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion The application of glaze material may be an effective technique for achieving smoother surfaces in resin-based hybrid CAD-CAM materials.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective The objective of this study was to assess the impact of various surface finishing protocols on the surface roughness of resin-based hybrid CAD-CAM materials Materials and Methods Three distinct resin-based CAD-CAM blocks [Bright Crios (BC), Cerasmart (CS), and Vita Enamic (VE) (n = 10)] were used to create 90 specimens (1.5 ± 0.05 mm).
📊
Key Findings & Data:One specimen was chosen at random from each group for surface topography analysis, and it was scanned using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) at ×1000 magnification.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion The application of glaze material may be an effective technique for achieving smoother surfaces in resin-based hybrid CAD-CAM materials.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:90 specimens
⚙️Variables:CAD-CAM · composite resins · dental materials

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study was to assess the impact of various surface finishing protocols on the surface roughness of resin-based hybrid CAD-CAM materials Materials and Methods Three distinct resin-based CAD-CAM blocks [Bright Crios (BC), Cerasmart (CS), and Vita Enamic (VE) (n = 10)] were used to create 90 specimens (1.5 ± 0.05 mm). Three distinct surface treatments were applied to each group: glazing (G), mechanical polishing (MP), and control (C). One specimen was chosen at random from each group for surface topography analysis, and it was scanned using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) at ×1000 magnification. A profilometer was used to measure the surface roughness values. The normality of the data distribution was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The primary and combined impacts of surface treatment and material type on roughness values were assessed using the generalized linear model approach. The Bonferroni test was used for multiple comparisons. Results Surface roughness values showed statistically significant differences among the materials (p < 0.001). The highest mean roughness was observed in the control group of the VE material, while the lowest was found in its glaze group. In the VE and CS groups, the glazing procedure resulted in lower roughness values, with no statistically significant difference between them. In the BC groups, both mechanical polishing and glazing led to low roughness values, with no statistically significant difference between these two procedures. Conclusion The application of glaze material may be an effective technique for achieving smoother surfaces in resin-based hybrid CAD-CAM materials.

Özet

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı, farklı yüzey bitirme yöntemlerinin rezin esaslı hibrit CAD/CAM materyallerinin yüzey pürüzlülüğü üzerindeki etkilerini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada üç farklı hibrit CAD/CAM materyali kullanılmıştır: Brilliant Crios (BC), Cerasmart (CS) ve Vita Enamic (VE). Her birinden 30’ar adet olmak üzere, toplam 90 örnek 1.5 ± 0.05 mm kalınlığında kesilerek hazırlanmıştır. Örnekler, uygulanan yüzey bitirme yöntemlerine göre üç alt gruba ayrılmıştır: kontrol (C), mekanik polisaj (MP) ve glaze (G). Her gruptan rastgele seçilen birer örnek, yüzey morfolojisinin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla ×1000 büyütmeli taramalı elektron mikroskobunda (SEM) incelenmiştir. Yüzey pürüzlülüğü değerleri bir profilometre aracılığıyla kaydedilmiştir. Verilerin normal dağılıma uygunluğu Shapiro-Wilk testi ile test edilmiştir. Materyal türü, yüzey işlemi ve bu iki değişkenin etkileşimlerinin yüzey pürüzlülüğü üzerindeki etkileri Generalize Lineer Model (GLM) ile analiz edilmiş; çoklu karşılaştırmalar Bonferroni testi ile yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Yüzey pürüzlülüğü açısından materyaller arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark saptanmıştır (p < 0.001). En yüksek ortalama değer VE materyalinin kontrol grubunda, en düşük değer ise glaze uygulanan VE grubunda gözlenmiştir. VE ve CS gruplarında glaze uygulaması ile daha düşük pürüzlülük elde edilmiş olup, bu gruplar arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. BC grubunda ise mekanik polisaj ve glaze işlemleri benzer düzeyde düşük pürüzlülük sağlamış ve aralarında istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı fark gözlenmemiştir. Sonuç: Rezin esaslı hibrit CAD/CAM materyallerde yüzey pürüzlülüğünü azaltmada glaze uygulaması etkili bir yöntem olarak değerlendirilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yavuz, T., Evmek, B. Y., Dilber, E. (2026). Effects of Different Surface Finishing Processes on the Surface Roughness of Hybrid CAD/CAM Materials. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, Volume: 27 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.69601/meandrosmdj.1734619

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (42)

  1. Al-Samadani KH. The Effect of Preventive Agents (Mouthwashes/Gels) on the Color Stability of Dental Resin-Based Composite Materials. Dent J (Basel) 2017;5(2):18.
  2. Acar O, Yilmaz B, Altintas SH, Chandrasekaran I, Johnston WM. Color stainability of CAD/CAM and nanocomposite resin materials. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115(1):71-75.
  3. Atala MH, Yegin E, Atala N, Senlen E, Baglar S. Effects of mouthrinses on discoloration of CAD-CAM manufactured restorative materials. Am J Dent 2019;32(6):293-298.
  4. Blatz MB, Conejo J. The Current State of Chairside Digital Dentistry and Materials. Dent Clin North Am 2019;63(2):175-197.
  5. Gurdal I, Atay A, Eichberger M, Cal E, Usumez A, Stawarczyk B. Color change of CAD-CAM materials and composite resin cements after thermocycling. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120(4):546-552.
  6. Jeong H-Y, Lee H-H, Choi Y-S. Mechanical properties of hybrid computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials after aging treatments. Ceram. Int. 2018;44(16):19217-19226.
  7. Lambert H, Durand JC, Jacquot B, Fages M. Dental biomaterials for chairside CAD/CAM: State of the art. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9(6):486-495.
  8. Motevasselian F, Amiri Z, Chiniforush N, Mirzaei M, Thompson V. In Vitro Evaluation of the Effect of Different Surface Treatments of a Hybrid Ceramic on the Microtensile Bond Strength to a Luting Resin Cement. J Lasers Med Sci 2019;10(4):297-303.
  9. Petrini M, Ferrante M, Su B. Fabrication and characterization of biomimetic ceramic/polymer composite materials for dental restoration. Dent Mater 2013;29(4):375-381.
  10. Dirxen C, Blunck U, Preissner S. Clinical performance of a new biomimetic double network material. Open Dent J 2013;7:118-122.
  11. Lawson NC, Bansal R, Burgess JO. Wear, strength, modulus and hardness of CAD/CAM restorative materials. Dent Mater 2016;32(11):e275-e283.
  12. Elsaka SE. Bond strength of novel CAD/CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments. J Adhes Dent 2014;16(6):531-540.
  13. Bojemüller E, Coldea A. VITA ENAMIC Technical-Scientific Documentation. Bad Säckingen, Germany: VITA Zahnfabrik; 2012.
  14. Coldea A, Swain MV, Thiel N. Mechanical properties of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network materials. Dent Mater 2013;29(4):419-426.
  15. Barutcigil K, Barutcigil C, Kul E, Ozarslan MM, Buyukkaplan US. Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Bond Strength of Resin Cement to a CAD/CAM Restorative Material. J Prosthodont 2019;28(1):71-78.
  16. Ozarslan MM, Buyukkaplan US, Barutcigil C, Arslan M, Turker N, Barutcigil K. Effects of different surface finishing procedures on the change in surface roughness and color of a polymer infiltrated ceramic network material. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8(1):16-20.
  17. Lawson NC, Burgess JO. Gloss and Stain Resistance of Ceramic-Polymer CAD/CAM Restorative Blocks. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016;28 Suppl 1:S40-45.
  18. Ural C, Duran I, Evmek B, Kavut I, Cengiz S, Yuzbasioglu E. Light transmittance and surface roughness of a feldspathic ceramic CAD-CAM material as a function of different surface treatments. BMC Oral Health 2016;17(1):16.
  19. Al-Harbi FA, Ayad NM, ArRejaie AS, Bahgat HA, Baba NZ. Effect of Aging Regimens on Resin Nanoceramic Chairside CAD/CAM Material. J Prosthodont 2017;26(5):432-439.
  20. Aydin N, Karaoglanoglu S, Oktay EA. Investigation the effects of whitening toothpastes on color change of resin-based CAD/CAM blocks. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(6):884-890.
  21. Yamaguchi S, Li H, Sakai T, Lee C, Kitagawa H, Imazato S. CAD-CAM resin composites: Effective components for further development. Dent Mater 2024;40(3):527-530.
  22. Papathanasiou I, Kamposiora P, Dimitriadis K, Papavasiliou G, Zinelis S. In vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM composite materials. J Dent 2023;136:104623.
  23. Elmoselhy HAS, Hassanien OES, Haridy MF, Salam El Baz MAE, Saber S. Two‑year clinical performance of indirect restorations fabricated from CAD/CAM nano hybrid composite versus lithium disilicate in mutilated vital teeth. A randomized controlled trial. BMC Oral Health 2024;24(1):101.
  24. Melc T, Attin T, Eyuboglu TF, Ozcan M. Flexural Strength of Modern CAD/CAM Restoratives After Artificial Aging. Materials (Basel) 2024;17(21):5178.
  25. Fathy H, Hamama HH, El-Wassefy N, Mahmoud SH. Clinical performance of resin-matrix ceramic partial coverage restorations: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 2022;26(5):3807-3822.
  26. Muhammed HA, Mahmoud EM, Fahmy AE, Nasr DM. The effect of sandblasting versus acid etching on the surface roughness and biaxial flexural strength of CAD/CAM resin-matrix ceramics (In vitro study). BMC Oral Health 2023;23(1):169.
  27. Unalan Degirmenci B, Degirmenci A, Seyfioglu Polat Z. The Influence of Thermocycling and Ultraviolet Aging on Surface Characteristics and the Repair Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Resin Nanoceramics. J Funct Biomater 2025;16(5):156.
  28. Habibnezhad A, Ahmadi G, Naderi N. Surface Roughness and Wear Behavior of CAD/CAM Ceramics Against Vita Mark II. Clin Exp Dent Res 2025;11(4):e70174.
  29. Jung M. Finishing and polishing of a hybrid composite and a heat-pressed glass ceramic. Oper Dent 2002;27(2):175-183.
  30. Mormann WH, Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Sener B, Attin T, Mehl A. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2013;20:113-125.
  31. Fasbinder DJ, Neiva GF. Surface Evaluation of Polishing Techniques for New Resilient CAD/CAM Restorative Materials. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016;28(1):56-66.
  32. Bollen CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dent Mater 1997;13(4):258-269.
  33. Jones CS, Billington RW, Pearson GJ. The in vivo perception of roughness of restorations. Br Dent J 2004;196(1):42-45; discussion 31.
  34. Joniot S, Salomon JP, Dejou J, Gregoire G. Use of two surface analyzers to evaluate the surface roughness of four esthetic restorative materials after polishing. Oper Dent 2006;31(1):39-46.
  35. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Yuzbasioglu E, Bal S. The effects of porcelain polishing systems on the color and surface texture of feldspathic porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(2):122-128.
  36. Egilmez F, Ergun G, Cekic-Nagas I, Vallittu PK, Lassila LVJ. Comparative color and surface parameters of current esthetic restorative CAD/CAM materials. J Adv Prosthodont 2018;10(1):32-42.
  37. Spitznagel FA, Vuck A, Gierthmuhlen PC, Blatz MB, Horvath SD. Adhesive Bonding to Hybrid Materials: An Overview of Materials and Recommendations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2016;37(9):630-637.
  38. Alhassan M, Maawadh A, Labban N, Alnafaiy SM, Alotaibi HN, BinMahfooz AM. Effect of different surface treatments on the surface roughness and gloss of resin-modified CAD/CAM ceramics. Appl Sci 2022;12(23):11972.
  39. Aykent F, Yondem I, Ozyesil AG, Gunal SK, Avunduk MC, Ozkan S. Effect of different finishing techniques for restorative materials on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103(4):221-227.
  40. Haralur SB. Evaluation of efficiency of manual polishing over autoglazed and overglazed porcelain and its effect on plaque accumulation. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4(4):179-186.
  41. Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Ohmiti K, Rousson V. Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load. Dent Mater 2010;26(4):306-319.
  42. Kilinc H, Turgut S. Optical behaviors of esthetic CAD-CAM restorations after different surface finishing and polishing procedures and UV aging: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120(1):107-113