[Comparison of surface roughness of nanofilled and microhybrid composite resins after curing and polishing].
OBJECTIVE
To compare the surface roughness of nanofilled dental composite resin and microhybrid composite resins after curing and polishing.


METHODS
A nanofilled composite (Z350) and 4 microhybrid composites (P60, Z250, Spectrum, and AP-X) were fabricated from the lateral to the medial layers to prepare 8 mm×8 mm×5 mm cubical specimens. The 4 lateral surfaces of each specimens were polished with abrasive disks (Super-Snap). Profilometer was used to test the mean surface roughness (Ra) after polishing.


RESULTS
P60 had the lowest Ra (0.125∓0.030 µm) followed by Z250 and Spectrum. The Ra of Z350 (0.205∓0.052 µm) was greater than that of the other 3 resins, and AP-X had the roughest surfaces. Under scanning electron microscope, the polished faces of P60 resin were characterized by minor, evenly distributed particles with fewer scratches; the polished faces of Z350 presented with scratches where defects of the filling material could be seen.


CONCLUSIONS
The nanofilled composite Z350 has smooth surface after polishing by abrasive disks, but its smoothness remains inferior to that of other micro-hybrid composite resins.
Department of Stomatology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, China. E-mail: liu_shenghong@163.com.
Hong
H
Jiang
Da
D
Lv
Kailei
K
Liu
Weisheng
W
Zhang
Yao
Y
Yao
Chuhong
C
Liao
D000180:Acrylic Resins; D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D003775:Dental Polishing; D008422:Materials Testing; D011140:Polyurethanes; D013499:Surface Properties
D000180:Acrylic Resins; C029012:Composite Dental Resin; D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D011140:Polyurethanes