The effect of polishing protocol on surface gloss of different restorative resin composites.

Biomaterial investigations in dentistry Pub Date : 2020-01-03 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1080/26415275.2019.1708201
Lippo Lassila, Eija Säilynoja, Roosa Prinssi, Pekka K Vallittu, Sufyan Garoushi
{"title":"The effect of polishing protocol on surface gloss of different restorative resin composites.","authors":"Lippo Lassila,&nbsp;Eija Säilynoja,&nbsp;Roosa Prinssi,&nbsp;Pekka K Vallittu,&nbsp;Sufyan Garoushi","doi":"10.1080/26415275.2019.1708201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> The purpose of this <i>in vitro</i> study was to determine the effects of different polishing protocols on the surface gloss (SG) of different commercial dental resin composites (RCs). <b>Material and methods:</b> A total of 147 block-shaped specimens (40 mm length × 10 mm width × 2 mm thick) were made from conventional RCs (G-aenial Ant. and Flo X), bulk-fill RC (Filtek Bulk Fill), fluoride-releasing RCs (BEAUTIFIL II, ACTIVA-Restorative) and discontinuous microfiber-reinforced RCs (Alert and everX Flow). Each group was subdivided into seven subgroups (<i>n</i> = 3), according to polishing protocol: Laboratory-machine polishing with different siliconcarbide paper grits (G1: 320) → (G2: 800) → (G3: 1200) → (G4: 2000) → (G5: 4000). Chairside-hand polishing using a series of Sof-Lex spiral (G6) and abrasive polishing points (G7). Glossmeter was used to determine the SG at 60° incidence angle. SG was measured before and after polishing. Three-dimensional (3 D) noncontact optical profilometer and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis were performed. Data were analyzed using ANOVA (<i>p</i> = .05). <b>Results:</b> Significant differences in SG (ranged 3-93 GU) were found according to the type of polishing protocol and RC (<i>p</i> < .05). Specimens polished with 4000 grit paper showed the highest SG (93 GU) values among all the groups tested. <b>Conclusions:</b> The tested chairside-hand polishing protocols presented lower SG values than laboratory-machine polishing (4000 silicon paper grit) and unpolished surfaces.</p>","PeriodicalId":72378,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2019.1708201","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2019.1708201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the effects of different polishing protocols on the surface gloss (SG) of different commercial dental resin composites (RCs). Material and methods: A total of 147 block-shaped specimens (40 mm length × 10 mm width × 2 mm thick) were made from conventional RCs (G-aenial Ant. and Flo X), bulk-fill RC (Filtek Bulk Fill), fluoride-releasing RCs (BEAUTIFIL II, ACTIVA-Restorative) and discontinuous microfiber-reinforced RCs (Alert and everX Flow). Each group was subdivided into seven subgroups (n = 3), according to polishing protocol: Laboratory-machine polishing with different siliconcarbide paper grits (G1: 320) → (G2: 800) → (G3: 1200) → (G4: 2000) → (G5: 4000). Chairside-hand polishing using a series of Sof-Lex spiral (G6) and abrasive polishing points (G7). Glossmeter was used to determine the SG at 60° incidence angle. SG was measured before and after polishing. Three-dimensional (3 D) noncontact optical profilometer and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis were performed. Data were analyzed using ANOVA (p = .05). Results: Significant differences in SG (ranged 3-93 GU) were found according to the type of polishing protocol and RC (p < .05). Specimens polished with 4000 grit paper showed the highest SG (93 GU) values among all the groups tested. Conclusions: The tested chairside-hand polishing protocols presented lower SG values than laboratory-machine polishing (4000 silicon paper grit) and unpolished surfaces.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
抛光工艺对不同恢复性树脂复合材料表面光泽度的影响。
目的:研究不同抛光工艺对不同牙科树脂复合材料表面光泽度的影响。材料与方法:采用常规RCs (G-aenial Ant)制作长40 mm ×宽10 mm ×厚2 mm的块状标本147个。和Flo X),散装填充RC (Filtek散装填充),氟化物释放RC (BEAUTIFIL II, ACTIVA-Restorative)和不连续微纤维增强RC (Alert和everX Flow)。每组又分为7个亚组(n = 3),按照抛光方案:不同碳化硅纸磨粒的实验室机抛光(G1: 320)→(G2: 800)→(G3: 1200)→(G4: 2000)→(G5: 4000)。采用一系列soflex螺旋(G6)和磨料抛光点(G7)进行椅边手工抛光。用光泽度计测定60°入射角下的光泽度。在抛光前后测量SG。三维(3d)非接触式光学轮廓仪和扫描电子显微镜(SEM)分析。数据分析采用方差分析(p = 0.05)。结果:根据抛光方案的类型和RC, SG值(范围为3-93 GU)存在显著差异(p)。结论:测试的椅边-手抛光方案的SG值低于实验室机器抛光(4000硅纸砂砾)和未抛光表面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Recipient of Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry's Young Author Award 2023. Reliability and agreement of root length measurements during orthodontic treatment in images from different CBCT machines using multiplanar reconstruction. The sealing ability of different endodontic biomaterials as an intra-orifice barrier: evaluation with high-performance liquid chromatography. An in vitro study on the influence of laser-activated irrigation on infiltration and leakage of a dual curing-resin cement as an endodontic sealer Accumulation and removal of Streptococcus mutans biofilm on enamel and root surfaces in vitro
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1