International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  14 (2024)
Volume  13 (2023)
Volume  12 (2022)
Volume  11 (2021)
Volume  10 (2020)
Volume  9 (2019)
Volume  8 (2018)
Volume  7 (2017)
Volume  6 (2016)
Volume  5 (2015)
Volume  4 (2014)
Volume  3 (2013)
Volume  2 (2012)
Volume  1 (2011)
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Influence of Different Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Microhardness of Bulk-fill Resin-based Composites: An In Vitro Study

Siti H Omar, Muhammad S Alauddin, Laila A Hassan, Faizah A Fatah

Keywords : Bulk-fill resin composites, Surface microhardness, Surface roughness

Citation Information : Omar SH, Alauddin MS, Hassan LA, Fatah FA. Influence of Different Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Microhardness of Bulk-fill Resin-based Composites: An In Vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2024; 14 (4):242-249.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1482

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-12-2024

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


Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the surface roughness (Ra) and microhardness of bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) treated with different polishing and finishing systems. Materials and methods: One hundred twenty-eight disks were fabricated with four types of bulk-filled RBCs (n = 32 each) (SDR Plus flowable, SonicFill nanohybrid, Filtek One nanofiller, and Beautifil-Bulk packable). Each group of 32 disks was further divided into subgroups of 8 disks, corresponding to each polishing and finishing system (Enhance® PoGo®, HiLusterPLUS, Sof-Lex™, and Super-Snap X-TREME). The Ra was assessed with a surface profilometer. Microhardness was determined using the Vickers hardness test. The surface texture was observed using field-emission scanning electron microscopy. The differences in mean Ra values and microhardness among the groups were determined using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The Tukey test was applied for post hoc comparisons. Correlations between microhardness and bulk-fill RBCs/finishing and polishing protocols were indicated by Pearson's correlation test. Results: The polishing systems had a significant impact on Ra (p < 0.001). Among the tested combinations, SonicFill 3 RBCs polished with the Super-Snap X-TREME system demonstrated the lowest Ra (0.13 ± 0.13 µm), while SDR Plus polished with the same system exhibited the highest Ra value (0.37 ± 0.10 µm). Microhardness values differed significantly among the RBC types (p < 0.001) but were not significantly influenced by the polishing systems (p > 0.05). A weak yet significant correlation was identified between Ra and microhardness (r = 0.272, p = 0.007). Conclusion: All polishing systems evaluated in this study yielded clinically acceptable Ra values for all tested RBC materials. The smoothest surfaces were achieved with nanohybrid composites polished using the Super-Snap X-TREME system. The roughest surfaces were observed with bulk-fill flowable composites polished with the same system. Despite not being specifically tailored to the tested RBCs, the polishing and finishing systems demonstrated comparable performance in achieving satisfactory Ra.

PDF Share
  1. Abed YA, Sabry HA, Alrobeigy NA. Degree of conversion and surface hardness of bulk-fill composite versus incremental-fill composite. Tanta Dent J 2015;12(2):71–80. DOI: 10.1016/j.tdj.2015.01.003
  2. Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, et al. Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review. Br Dent J 2017;222(5):337–344. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.214
  3. Van Ende A, De Munck J, Lise DP, et al. Bulk-fill composites: a review of the current literature. J Adhes Dent 2017;19(2):95–109. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a38141
  4. Flury S, Hayoz S, Peutzfeldt A, et al. Depth of cure of resin composites: is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials. Dent Mater 2012;28:521–528. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.02.002
  5. de Menezes AJ, do Nascimento Barbosa L, Leite JV, et al. Clinical outcomes of bulk-fill resin composite restorations: a 10-year mapping review and evidence gap map. J Esthet Restor Dent 2024. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.13339
  6. Perez CR, Hirata RJ, da Silva AH, et al. Effect of a glaze/composite sealant on the 3-D surface roughness of aesthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent 2009;34:674–680. DOI: 10.2341/08-014-L
  7. Topcu FT, Erdemir U, Sahinkesen G, et al. Evaluation of microhardness, surface roughness, and wear behavior of different types of resin composites polymerized with two different light sources. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2010;92:470–478. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31540
  8. Habib SR, Nakshabandi AZ, Al Shawi AA, et al. Degree of streptococcus mutans colonization on common restorative materials subjected to wear cycle. Int J Prosthodont 2020;34(5):626–634. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.6519
  9. 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. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2012.4.4.179
  10. Barbosa SH, Zanata RL, Navarro MFDL, et al. Effect of different finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness of microfilled, hybrid and packable composite resins. Braz Dent J 2005;16:39–44. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402005000100007
  11. Kaminedi RR, Penumatsa NV, Priya T, et al. The influence of finishing/polishing time and cooling system on surface roughness and microhardness of two different types of composite resin restorations. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2014;4(Suppl. 2):S99–S104. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.146211
  12. Al-Sarhan MA, Habib SR, AlJamhan AS, et al. Effect of finishing and polishing bulk-fill composites on salivary and Streptococcus mutans adhesion. Biosc Biotech Res Comm 2020;13(1):273–279. DOI: 10.2174/1874210602115010025
  13. Altınışık H, Özyurt E. Effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss values of single-shade resin composites. BMC Oral Health 2024;24(1):1391. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-05163-z
  14. Sánchez JE, Rodríguez KG, Armas A, et al. Different techniques to eliminate the layer of resin inhibited by oxygen, in a nanohybrid composite subjected to abrasive wear. Dominio Cienc 2018;4: 20–33. DOI: 10.3390/polym14153053
  15. Ramírez GG, Medina JE, Aliaga AS, et al. Effect of polishing on the surface microhardness of nanohybrid composite resins subjected to 35% hydrogen peroxide: an in vitro study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2021;11:216–221. DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_9_21
  16. Mousavinasab SM, Meyers I. Comparison of depth of cure, hardness and heat generation of LED and high intensity QTH light sources. Eur J Dent 2011;5:299–304. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1698895
  17. Galvao MR, Caldas SG, Bagnato VS, et al. Evaluation of degree of conversion and hardness of dental composites photoactivated with different light guide tips. Eur J Dent 2013;7:86–93. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.119058
  18. Han JM, Zhang H, Choe HS, et al. Abrasive wear and surface roughness of contemporary dental composite resin. Dent Mater J 2014;33 (6):725–732. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2013-339
  19. Shetty MS, Shenoy KK. An in vitro analysis of wear resistance of commercially available acrylic denture teeth. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2010;10:149–153. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-010-0023-z
  20. Barnes CM. Polishing esthetic restorative materiaI. Dimens Dent Hyg 2010;8(1):26–28.
  21. Council on Dental Materials and Devices. New American Dental Association specification. No 27 for direct filling resins. J Am Dent Assoc 1977;94:1191–1194. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1977.0360
  22. Ansuj MD, Santos IS, Marquezan M, et al. Evaluation of the surface roughness of a nanofilled composite resin submitted to different smoothing and finishing techniques. Revista de Odontologia da UNESP 2016;45:110–114. DOI: 10.1590/1807-2577.11415
  23. Sharafeddin F, Jowkar Z, Bahrani S. Comparison between the effect of adding microhydroxyapatite and chitosan on surface roughness and Microhardness of resin modified and conventional glass ionomer cements. J Clin Exp Dent 2021;13(8):e737. DOI: 10.4317/jced.58012
  24. Erturk-Avunduk AT, Atılan-Yavuz S, Filiz H, et al. A comparative study of polishing systems on optical properties and surface roughness of additively manufactured and conventional resin-based composites. Sci Rep 2024;14(1):25658. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77449-9
  25. Lassila L, Loimaranta V, Vallittu PK, et al. Bacterial adhesion and surface roughness of particulate-filled and short fiber-reinforced composites. Odontology 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-024-00997-z
  26. Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. The surface roughness of enamel-to-enamel contact areas compared with the intrinsic roughness of dental resin composites. J Dent Res 1991;70:1299–1305. DOI: 10.1177/00220345910700091301
  27. Atabek D, Bani M, Özta N, et al. The effect of various polishing systems on the surface roughness of composite resins. Acta Odontol Turc 2016;33(2):69–74. DOI: 10.17214/aot.99872
  28. Yap AU, Lye KW, Sau CW. Surface characteristics of tooth-colored restoratives polished utilizing different polishing systems. Oper Dent 1997;22:260–265.
  29. Tjan AH, Chan CA. The polishability of posterior composites. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:138–146. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89) 90361-2
  30. Ergücü Z, Türkün LS. Surface roughness of novel resin composites polished with one-step systems. Oper Dent 2007;32(2):185–192. DOI: 10.2341/06-56
  31. Zhang L, Yu P, Wang XY. Surface roughness and gloss of polished nanofilled and nanohybrid resin composites. J Dent Sci 2021;16(4):1198–1203. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2021.03.003
  32. Aljamhan A, Habib SR, Al Sarhan MA, et al. Effect of finishing and polishing on the surface roughness of bulk fill composites. Open Dent J 2021;15(1):25–32. DOI: 10.2174/1874210602115010025
  33. Tepe H, Erdılek AD, Sahın M, et al. Effect of different polishing systems and speeds on the surface roughness of resin composites. J Cons Dent 2023;26(1):36. DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_395_22
  34. Jefferies S. Abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative dentistry: a state-of-the-art review. Dent Clin N Am 2007;51(2):379–397. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2006.12.002
  35. Lu H, Roeder LB, Lei L, et al. Effect of surface roughness on stain resistance of dental resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005;17:102–108. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2005.tb00094.x
  36. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Sturdevant CM, et al. Sturdevant's art & science of operative dentistry. In: Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ, editors. Chapter 7: Instruments and equipment for tooth preparation. St Louis: Mosby; 2002. pp. 307–344.
  37. O'Brien WJ. Dental materials and their selection. In: O'Brien WJ, editor. Chapter 10: Abrasion, polishing, and bleaching. Chicago: Quintessence Books; 2002. pp. 156–164.
  38. Watanabe T, Miyazaki M, Takamizawa T, et al. Influence of polishing duration on surface roughness of resin composites. J Oral Sci 2005;47:21–25. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.47.21
  39. Kovoor KL, Attavar SH. Comparative evaluation of the surface roughness of a microhybrid and nanohybrid composites using various polishing system: a profilometric analysis. J Int Oral Health 2023;15(4):372–376. DOI: 10.4103/jioh.jioh_130_23
  40. Chowdhury D, Mukherjee S, Maity I, et al. Surface roughness and microhardness evaluation of composite resin restorations subjected to three different polishing systems immediately and after 24 h: an in vitro study. J Cons Dent Endod 2023;26(6):639–645. DOI: 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_106_23
  41. Yap AU, Yap SH, Teo CK, et al. Finishing/polishing of composite and compomer restoratives: effectiveness of one-step systems. Oper Dent 2004;29:275–279. PMID: 15195727.
  42. AlJazairy YH, Mitwalli HA, AlMoajel NA. The effect of polishing systems on surface roughness of nanohybrid and microhybrid resin composites. Am J Dent 2019;2(1):47–52.
  43. Quiroz L, Lentz DL. The effect of polishing procedures on light-cured composite restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1985;6(6): 437–439.
  44. Jaramillo R, López E, Latorre F, et al. Effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of nano-hybrid and nano-filling composite resins: a systematic review. Dent J 2021;9:95. DOI: 10.3390/dj9080095
  45. Jones CS, Billington RW, Pearson GJ. Laboratory study of the loads, speeds and times to finish and polish direct restorative materials. J Oral Rehab 2005;32(9):686–692. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01487.x
  46. Monterubbianesi R, Tosco V, Sabbatini S, et al. How can different polishing timing influence methacrylate and dimethacrylate bulk fill composites? Evaluation of chemical and physical properties. Bio Med Res Int 2020;2020:1–8. DOI: 10.1155/2020/1965818
  47. Ikejima I, Nomoto R, McCabe JF. Shear punch strength and flexural strength of model composites with varying filler volume fraction, particle size and silanation. Dent Mater 2003;19:206–211. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(02)00031-3
  48. Moszner N, Salz U. New developments of polymeric dental composites. Prog Polym Sci 2001;26:535–576. DOI: 10.1016/S0079-6700(01)00005-3
  49. Münchow EA, Correa MB, Ogliari FA, et al. Correlation between surface roughness and microhardness of experimental composites with varying filler concentration. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(3): 299–304. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1141
  50. Yap AU, Sau CW, Lye KW. Effects of finishing/polishing time on surface characteristics of tooth-coloured restoratives. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:456–461. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.1998.00253.x
  51. Yadav RD, Raisingani D, Jindal D, et al. A comparative analysis of different finishing and polishing devices on nanofilled, microfilled, and hybrid composite: a scanning electron microscopy and profilometric study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9:201–208. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1364
  52. Kaizer MR, de Oliveira-Ogliari A, Cenci MS, et al. Do nanofill or submicron composites show improved smoothness and gloss? A systematic review of in vitro studies. Dental Materials 2014;30(4):e41–e78. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.01.001
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.