Journals / 7tepe Klinik / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2

Effect of different polishing system on surface roughness of composite resins

Farkli cila sistemlerinin kompozit rezinlerin yüzey pürüzlülükleri üzerine etkisi

Pages
147–153
DOI
—
🏛️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: Surface roughness differs according to both the polishing systems and the composite resin materials that used in this study. 3M SofLex disc shows more effective results in all composite groups according to the other polishing systems.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: In this study, it was aimed to investigate the effects of four different composite polishing systems on the surface roughness of three different composite resins.
📊
Key Findings & Data:MAterials and Method: An anterior (GradiaSO), a posterior (Filtek P60) and a flowable composite (Clearfil Majesty Flow) were used in this study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Surface roughness differs according to both the polishing systems and the composite resin materials that used in this study. 3M SofLex disc shows more effective results in all composite groups according to the other polishing systems.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:120 specimens
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: In this study, it was aimed to investigate the effects of four different composite polishing systems on the surface roughness of three different composite resins. MAterials and Method: An anterior (GradiaSO), a posterior (Filtek P60) and a flowable composite (Clearfil Majesty Flow) were used in this study. A total of 120 specimens with a diameter of 5 mm and a thickness of 2 mm were prepared using teflon molds, with 40 samples in each composite batch. For each polishing system, all samples were divided into 4 subgroups (n = 10). SofLex Disk, SofLex Spiral, Dimanto and IdentoFlex Composite Polishers were used. The prepared composite samples were roughened with the thickest grained abrasive of the Sof-Lex disc. The roughness values (Ra) of each sample were then recorded using a surface roughness device. After the samples were incubated in distilled water at room temperature for 24 hours, polishing procedure were carried out and surface roughness were measured aga in. Multiple analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD multiple tests were used for statistical analysis (p 0.001). All polishing systems were most effective in Clearfil Majesty Flow (p<0.001). Conclusion: Surface roughness differs according to both the polishing systems and the composite resin materials that used in this study. 3M SofLex disc shows more effective results in all composite groups according to the other polishing systems.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, dört farklı kompozit cila sisteminin farklı türdeki üç kompozit rezinin yüzey pürüzlülüğü üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmada bir anterior (GradiaSO), bir posterior (Filtek P60) ve bir akıcı kompozit (Clearfil Majesty Flow) kullanılmıştır. Her kompozit grubunda 40 örnek olacak şekilde, 5 mm çapında 2 mm kalınlığında toplam 120 örnek teflon kalıplar kullanılarak hazırlandı. Her bir cila sistemi için tüm örnekler 4’er alt gruplara ayrıldı (n=10). Her kompozit grubu için SofLex Disk ve SofLex Spiral, Dimanto ve IdentoFlex Composite Polishers cila sistemleri kullanıldı. Hazırlanan kompozit örnekleri Sof-Lex Disk’in en kalın grenli zımparası ile pürüzlü hale getirildi. Ardından profilometre cihazı ile pürüzlülük değerleri (Ra) kaydedildi. Örnekler 24 saat boyunca oda sıcaklığında distile su içerisinde bekletildikten sonra cila işlemi yapıldı ve yüzey pürüzlülüğü tekrar ölçüldü. Çok yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD çoklu testleri ile istatistiksel analiz yapıldı (p 0,001). Tüm cila sistemleri en çok Clearfil Majesty Flow’da etkili bulunmuştur (p<0,001). Sonuç: Yüzey pürüzlülüğü bu çalışmada kullanılan hem cila sistemlerine hem de kompozit rezin materyallere göre farklılık göstermektedir. Bütün kompozit gruplarında 3M SofLex disk cila seti diğer sistemlere göre daha etkili sonuçlar ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

BİLGİLİ, D., DÜNDAR, A., BARUTÇUGİL, Ç., ÖCAL, İ. B. (2020). Effect of different polishing system on surface roughness of composite resins. 7tepe Klinik, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 147–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/141950

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Aytac F et al. Effects of Novel Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Morphology of Nanocomposites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016; 28: 247-261
  2. Chen MH. Update on dental nanocomposites. J Dent Res 2010; 89: 549-560
  3. Erdemir U, Sancakli HS, Yildiz E. The effect of one-step and multi-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and microhardness of novel resin composites. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 198-205
  4. Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134: 1382-1390
  5. Beun S et al. Characterization of nanofilled compared to universal and microfilled composites. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 51-59
  6. Bayne SC et al. A characterization of first-generation f lowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998; 129: 567577
  7. Yu B, Lee YK. Differences in color, translucency and fluorescence between flowable and universal resin composites. J Dent 2008; 36: 840-846
  8. Hosoya Y et al. Effects of polishing on surface roughness and gloss of S-PRG filled flowable resin composite. Am J Dent 2012; 25: 227-230
  9. Lu H, Roeder LB, Powers JM. Effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003; 15: 297-303
  10. Da Costa J et al. The effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of various resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007; 19: 214-224
  11. Musanje L, Ferracane JL, Ferracane LL. Effects of resin formulation and nanofiller surface treatment on in vitro wear of experimental hybrid resin composite. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006; 77: 120-125
  12. Turssi CP, Ferracane JL, Serra MC. Abrasive wear of resin composites as related to finishing and polishing procedures. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 641-648
  13. Borges AB, Marsilio AL, Pagani C, Rodrigues JR. Surface roughness of packable composite resins polished with various systems. J Esthet Restor Dent 2004; 16: 42-47
  14. Baseren M. Surface roughness of nanofill and nanohybrid composite resin and ormocer-based tooth-colored restorative materials after several finishing and polishing procedures. J Biomater Appl 2004; 19: 121-134
  15. Morgan M. Finishing and polishing of direct posterior resin restorations. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2004; 16: 211-7; quiz 218
  16. Ryba TM, Dunn WJ, Murchison DF. Surface roughness of various packable composites. Oper Dent 2002; 27: 243-247
  17. Barbosa SH, Zanata RL, Navarro MF, Nunes OB. Effect of different finishing and polishing techniq