International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Four Composite Polishing Systems: An In Vitro Study

Ramin Atash, Amirhossein Fathi, Hoda Salehi, Yalda Abedian, Peter Bottenberg, Kimia Baghaei

Keywords : Composite resins, Dental polishing, Microhybrid, Nanohybrid, Roughness

Citation Information : Atash R, Fathi A, Salehi H, Abedian Y, Bottenberg P, Baghaei K. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Four Composite Polishing Systems: An In Vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2024; 14 (1):16-22.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1443

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-03-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Purpose: To evaluate the surface roughness of six composites polished with four different polishing systems. Materials and methods: Cylindrical resin specimens were prepared for each different composite group of nanohybrid (Clearfil Majestic Esthetic®, G-aenial A'CHORD®, and Simplishade®) and microhybrid (Amaris®, Herculite®, and APX®), resulting in a total of ninety-six resin cylinders. Each cylinder was drilled to create five wells of 3 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. Each composite group size was 80 and was divided into four subgroups. The first subgroup was polished with the Sof Lex® system, the second subgroup with the Diapol Twist® system, the third subgroup with the Diacomp Plus® system, and the fourth subgroup with the Identoflex Ceramic Polish® system. Half of the samples from each subgroup (n = 10) would undergo an additional polishing step using a diamond paste. The results were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test. Results: Amaris® composite had significantly higher roughness than the other composites, both with and without polishing paste (PP) (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in roughness (p = 0.660) for both nanohybrid and microhybrid composites, indicating that their average roughness values were similar. Both types of composite and the finishing/polishing system were significant (p < 0.001) factors influencing roughness. Conclusion: Diamond particle polishers yield better polishing results on composites than aluminum oxide (Al2O3) particle polishers. There is no significant difference in roughness between micro- and nanohybrid composites. Therefore, clinicians should focus on polishing systems instead of composite types. The use of PP slightly improves surface roughness.

PDF Share
  1. Kocaagaoglu H, Aslan T, Gürbulak A, et al. Efficacy of polishing kits on the surface roughness and color stability of different composite resins. Niger J Clin Pract 2017;20(5):557–565. DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.181387
  2. Paolone G, Moratti E, Goracci C, et al. Effect of finishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of full-body Bulk-fill resin composites. Materials (Basel) 2020;13(24). DOI: 10.3390/ma13245657
  3. Patel B, Chhabra N, Jain D. Effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness of nano-hybrid composites. J Conserv Dent 2016;19(1):37–40. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.173192
  4. Babina K, Polyakova M, Sokhova I, et al. The effect of finishing and polishing sequences on the surface roughness of three different nanocomposites and composite/enamel and composite/cementum interfaces. Nanomaterials (Basel) 2020;10(7). DOI: 10.3390/nano10071339
  5. Da Costa J, Ferracane J, Paravina RD, et al. The effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of various resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19(4):214–216. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00104.x
  6. Shintani H, Satou J, Satou N, et al. Effects of various finishing methods on staining and accumulation of Streptococcus mutans HS-6 on composite resins. Dent Mater 1985;1(6):225–227. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(85)80046-4
  7. Silva JP, Coelho A, Paula A, et al. The influence of irrigation during the finishing and polishing of composite resin restorations-a systematic review of in vitro studies. Materials (Basel) 2021;14(7). DOI: 10.3390/ma14071675
  8. Daud A, Gray G, Lynch CD, et al. A randomised controlled study on the use of finishing and polishing systems on different resin composites using 3D contact optical profilometry and scanning electron microscopy. J Dent 2018;71:25–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.01.008
  9. Camassari JR, Correr-Sobrinho L, Correr AB, et al. Physical-mechanical properties of bulk fill composites submitted to biodegradation by Streptococcus mutans. Braz Dent J 2020;31(4):431–439. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440202003196
  10. Chour RG, Moda A, Arora A, et al. Comparative evaluation of effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness of composite resin: an in vitro study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016;6(Suppl 2):S166–S170. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.189761
  11. Carrabba M, Vichi A, Vultaggio G, et al. Effect of finishing and polishing on the surface roughness and gloss of feldspathic ceramic for chairside CAD/CAM systems. Oper Dent 2017;42(2):175–184. DOI: 10.2341/15-174-L
  12. Tholt de Vasconcellos B, Miranda-Júnior WG, Prioli R, et al. Surface roughness in ceramics with different finishing techniques using atomic force microscope and profilometer. Oper Dent 2006;31(4):442–449. DOI: 10.2341/05-54
  13. St-Pierre L, Martel C, Crépeau H, et al. Influence of polishing systems on surface roughness of composite resins: polishability of composite resins. Oper Dent 2019;44(3):E122–E132. DOI: 10.2341/17-140-L
  14. van Dijken JW, Ruyter IE. Surface characteristics of posterior composites after polishing and toothbrushing. Acta Odontol Scand 1987;45(5):337–346. DOI: 10.3109/00016358709096356
  15. da Costa J, Adams-Belusko A, Riley K, et al. The effect of various dentifrices on surface roughness and gloss of resin composites. J Dent 2010;38(Suppl 2):e123–e128. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.02.005
  16. Türkün LS, Türkün M. The effect of one-step polishing system on the surface roughness of three esthetic resin composite materials. Oper Dent 2004;29(2):203–211.
  17. Heintze SD, Reichl FX, Hickel R. Wear of dental materials: clinical significance and laboratory wear simulation methods -A review. Dent Mater J 2019;38(3):343–353. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2018-140
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.