The Assessment of the Abrasiveness for Resin Composite Finishing & Polishing Systems

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 3, 529 - 535, 27.09.2021

Bora Korkut , Tuna Unal

https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.852450

Cited By: 4

Abstract

Objective: This in vitro study was aimed to assess the abrasiveness of 4 different composite finishing and polishing systems, on two different nano-hybrid composite materials.
Methods: 40 composite disc samples were prepared 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness for each nano-hybrid resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram BulkFill A1 body and IPS Empress Direct A1; Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Lichtenstein; n=80 in total). Each composite group was divided into 4 finishing and polishing system subgroups (Sof-Lex Disc, 3M, St. Paul MN, USA; Enhance&Pogo, Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany; OptraGloss, Ivoclar Vivadent, Shaan, Lichtenstein; Twist Dia, Kuraray Noritake, Tokyo, Japan; n=10 for each subgroup). Single surface of each sample was roughened with 600 and 800 grit sandpapers (Carbimet, Special Silicone Carbide Grinding Paper, IL, USA), respectively. Initial thickness (t1) was measured for each sample with a digital micrometer (BMI 770150, Germany). Then, 4 different finishing&polishing systems were preformed for one side of the samples, at 10 000 rpm, in dry conditions, by a single operator (30 s for a single materal). Final thicknesses (t2) were measured after finishing&polishing procedures. Statistical analyses were performed regarding t2-t1 values. Two-way Anova test was used to assess the level of abrasion for the composite and finishing&polishing materials. Tukey HSD was used for multiple comparisons.
Results: In terms of composite materials, IPS Empress Direct presented significantly a greater level of abrasion (52.85 ± 42.26B) than Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk Fill (p < 0.001). In terms of finishing & polishing materials, significantly a greater level of abrasiveness was observed for Sof-Lex Disc (91.25 ± 47.22b) among all (p < 0.001). There was no significant differences in abrasiveness, between Enhance&Pogo - Optragloss (p = 0.859), Enhance&Pogo - Twist Dia (p = 0. 891), and Twist Dia – Optragloss (p = 0.440).
Conclusion: Both the type of composite and the finishing & polishing material were considered effective factors for abrasion. The greatest level of abrasiveness was observed for the 4-step Sof-Lex Disc system (91 µm on average), for the total 120 seconds of application. The abrasiveness for the 2-step systems was similar and ranged between 24 – 36 µm on average, for 60 seconds of application. IPS Empress Direct presented a greater level of abrasion than Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk Fill on equal terms of finishing & polishing.

Keywords

Abrasiveness, level of abrasion, composite, finishing, polishing

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

-

Thanks

-

References

• 1. LeSage B. Finishing and polishing criteria for minimally invasive composite restorations. General Dent 2011; 59(6):422-428.
• 2. Bashetty K, Joshi S. The effect of one-step and multi-step polishing systems on surface texture of two different resin composites. J Conserv Dent 2010; 13(1):34-38.
• 3. Senawongse P, Pongprueksa P. Surface roughness of nanofill and nanohybrid resin composites after polishing and brushing. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007; 19(5):265-275.
• 4. Heintze SD, Reinhardt M, Müller F, Peschke A. Press-on force during polishing of resin composite restorations. Dent Mater 2019; 35(6):937-944.
• 5. Jefferies SR. Abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative dentistry: a state-of-the-art review. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 51(2):379-397.
• 6. Krejci I, Lutz F, Boretti R. Resin composite polishing—Filling the gaps. Quintessence Int 1999; 30(7):490-495.
• 7. Watanabe T, Miyazaki M, Takamizawa T, Kurokawa Hrikuta A, Ando S. Influence of polishing duration on surface roughness of resin composites. J Oral Sci 2005; 47(1):21-25.
• 8. Terry DA. Finishing and polishing adhesive restorations: part II. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2005; 17(8):545-548.
• 9. Daud A, Gray G, Lynch CD, Wilson NHF, Blum IR. 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.
• 10. Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Rousson V. Surface roughness and gloss of dental materials as a function of force and polishing time in vitro. Dent Mater 2006; 22:146-165.
• 11. Wilder Jr AD, Swift Jr EJ, May Jr KN, Thompson JY, McDougal RA. Effect of finishing technique on the microleakage and surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. J Dent 2000; 28(5):367-373.
• 12. Antonson SA, Yazici AR, Kilinc E, Antonson DE, Hardigan PC. Comparison of different finishing/polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of resin composites. J Dent 2011; 39:9-17.
• 13. Carneiro PM, Ramos TM, de Azevedo CS, de Lima E, de Souza SH, Turbino ML, Cesar PF, Matos AB. Influence of finishing and polishing techniques and abrasion on transmittance and roughness of composite resins. Oper Dent 2016; 41(6):634-641.
• 14. Kemaloglu H, Karaçolak G, Türkün LŞ. Can Reduced-Step Polishers Be as Effective as Multiple Step Polishers in Enhancing Surface Smoothness? J Esthet Restor Dent 2017; 29(1):31-40.
• 15. Kocaağaoğlu H, Aslan T, Gürbulak A, Albayrak H, Taşdemir Z, Gumus H. Efficacy of polishing kits on the surface roughness and color stability of different composite resins. Niger J Clin Pract 2017; 20(5):557-565.
• 16. Dodge WW, Dale RA, Cooley RL, Duke ES. Comparison of wet and dry finishing of resin composites with aluminum oxide discs. Dent Mater 1991; 1:18-20.
• 17. Barutcigil Ç, Yildiz M. Intrinsic and extrinsic discoloration of dimethacrylate and silorane based composites. J Dent 2012; 40(1):57-63.
• 18. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Kulunk S, Ural C, Kulunk T. The effect of polishing techniques on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96(1):33-40.
• 19. Reis AF, Giannini M, Lovadino JR, dos Santos Dias CT. The effect of six polishing systems on the surface roughness of two packable resin-based composites. Am J Dent 2002; 15:193-197.
• 20. Turkun LS, Turkun 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.
• 21. Daud A, Gray G, Lynch CD, Wilson NH, Blum IR. 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.
• 22. Avşar A, Yüzbaşıoğlu E, Sarac D. The effect of finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness and the color of nanocomposite resin restorative materials. Adv Clin Exp Med 2015; 24(5):881-890.
• 23. Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Rousson V. Surface roughness and gloss of dental materials as a function of force and polishing time in vitro. Dental Materials 2006; 22(2):146-165.
• 24. Yap AUJ, Yap SH, Teo CK, Ng JJ. Finishing/polishing of composite and compomer restoratives: effectiveness of one-step systems. Oper Dent 2004; 29:275-279.
• 25. Ergücü Z, Türkün LS. Surface roughness of novel resin composites polished with one-step systems. Oper Dent 2007; 32(2):185-192.
• 26. Marigo L, Rizzi M, LaTorre G, Rumi G. 3D surface profile analysis: Different finishing methods for resin composites. Oper Dent 2001; 26(6):562-568.
• 27. Stoddard JW, Johnson GH. An evaluation of polishing agents for composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65(4):491-495.
• 28. Takahashi R, Jin J, Nikaido T, Tagami J, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Surface characterization of current composites after toothbrush abrasion. Dent Mater J 2013; 32(1):75-82.
• 29. Alrahlah A, Silikas N, Watts DC. Post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill dental resin-composites. Dent Mater 2014; 30(2):149-154.
• 30. Lai G, Zhao L, Wang J, Kunzelmann KH. Surface properties and color stability of incrementally-filled and bulk-fill composites after in vitro toothbrushing. Am J Dent 2017; 30(5):262-266.