Surface roughness of new microhybrid resin-based composites.
BACKGROUND
Rough, poorly polished resin-based composite (RBC) surfaces contribute to staining, plaque accumulation, gingival irritation and recurrent caries. Proper finishing and polishing enhance both the esthetics and the longevity of restored teeth.


METHODS
The authors evaluated the influence of various finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness of four microhybrid RBCs. Thirty samples of each material were cured under Mylar matrix strips (Yates and Bird/Motloid, Chicago). All microhybrid RBC specimens were finished with multifluted carbide burs, except for the Mylar matrix strip samples, and then were polished using one of four finishing systems: Sof-Lex contouring and polishing disks (3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minn.); Enhance Finishing System (Dentsply-Caulk, Milford, Del.) followed by Prisma Gloss (Dentsply-Caulk) polishing paste application; Astropol finishing, polishing and high-gloss polishing system (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein); and Astrobrush polishing system (Ivoclar Vivadent). The authors tested the samples to obtain average surface roughness and analyzed the values.


RESULTS
The use of the Astrobrush technique caused the greatest roughness on all RBC specimens. The smoothest surface was produced with a carbide bur followed by aluminum oxide disks, Astropol technique and Enhance technique. Overall, there were differences in surface quality among the materials. InTen-S (Ivoclar Vivadent) had statistically lower surface roughness values after finishing and polishing with the Astrobrush technique, compared with the other RBCs.


CONCLUSIONS
The highest surface roughness values were achieved after the Astrobrush technique was used. The Sof-Lex aluminum oxide disks, and Enhance and Astropol techniques provided the smoothest surface.


CONCLUSIONS
The Sof-Lex, Enhance and Astropol techniques produced a smooth surface after the finishing and polishing of materials, while the Astrobrush technique yielded the least favorable results.
Gedik
Rütü
R
Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Diagnosis and Radiology, Sivas, Turkey.
Hürmüzlü
Feridun
F
Coşkun
Akin
A
Bektaş
Ozden Ozdel
OO
Ozdemir
Ali Kemal
AK
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D003188:Composite Resins; D003775:Dental Polishing; D008689:Methacrylates; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D010316:Particle Size; D013499:Surface Properties
D003188:Composite Resins; C466112:Esthet-X; C485362:InTen-S composite; D008689:Methacrylates; C451741:point 4 composite resin; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate