Cargando…

Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing

AIM: This study aims to investigate the effects of finishing and polishing procedures on four novel resin composites using three-dimensional optical profilometer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four composites classified according to their filler size, were selected: Filtek™ Z350 XT/Nanofill (3M™ ESPE™), Es...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nair, Veena S, Sainudeen, Shan, Padmanabhan, Prabeesh, Vijayashankar, L V, Sujathan, Unu, Pillai, Rajesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4760024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26957802
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173208
_version_ 1782416832690388992
author Nair, Veena S
Sainudeen, Shan
Padmanabhan, Prabeesh
Vijayashankar, L V
Sujathan, Unu
Pillai, Rajesh
author_facet Nair, Veena S
Sainudeen, Shan
Padmanabhan, Prabeesh
Vijayashankar, L V
Sujathan, Unu
Pillai, Rajesh
author_sort Nair, Veena S
collection PubMed
description AIM: This study aims to investigate the effects of finishing and polishing procedures on four novel resin composites using three-dimensional optical profilometer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four composites classified according to their filler size, were selected: Filtek™ Z350 XT/Nanofill (3M™ ESPE™), Esthet-X HD/Hybrid (Dentsply Caulk), Te Econom/Microfill (Ivoclar Vivadent(®)), Tetric EvoCeram(®) /Nanohybrid (Ivoclar Vivadent(®)). Composite specimens were made in Plexiglass mold and polished with Soflex (3M ESPE), Enhance + Pogo (Dentsply Caulk). Both the systems were used according to the manufacturers’ instructions, and the polished surfaces were assessed with an optical profilometer. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Kruskal-Wallis test and further pairwise comparison were performed by Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: The smoothest surfaces for all the resin composites tested were obtained from the Mylar strip; statistically significant differences were observed among them (P = 0.001). The order of composites was ranked from the lowest to highest surface roughness; Filtek Z350 XT < Te Econom < Tetric EvoCeram < Esthet XHD. Pairwise multiple comparison with Mann-Whitney test showed Filtek Z350 to have the smoothest surface and the least with Teric EvoCeram. Among the polishing systems, Soflex showed the smoothest surface and was significantly different from Pogo (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of the polishing systems seems to be dependent on the material used, treatment modality and also on the filler particle size.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4760024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47600242016-03-08 Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing Nair, Veena S Sainudeen, Shan Padmanabhan, Prabeesh Vijayashankar, L V Sujathan, Unu Pillai, Rajesh J Conserv Dent Original Article AIM: This study aims to investigate the effects of finishing and polishing procedures on four novel resin composites using three-dimensional optical profilometer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four composites classified according to their filler size, were selected: Filtek™ Z350 XT/Nanofill (3M™ ESPE™), Esthet-X HD/Hybrid (Dentsply Caulk), Te Econom/Microfill (Ivoclar Vivadent(®)), Tetric EvoCeram(®) /Nanohybrid (Ivoclar Vivadent(®)). Composite specimens were made in Plexiglass mold and polished with Soflex (3M ESPE), Enhance + Pogo (Dentsply Caulk). Both the systems were used according to the manufacturers’ instructions, and the polished surfaces were assessed with an optical profilometer. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Kruskal-Wallis test and further pairwise comparison were performed by Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: The smoothest surfaces for all the resin composites tested were obtained from the Mylar strip; statistically significant differences were observed among them (P = 0.001). The order of composites was ranked from the lowest to highest surface roughness; Filtek Z350 XT < Te Econom < Tetric EvoCeram < Esthet XHD. Pairwise multiple comparison with Mann-Whitney test showed Filtek Z350 to have the smoothest surface and the least with Teric EvoCeram. Among the polishing systems, Soflex showed the smoothest surface and was significantly different from Pogo (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of the polishing systems seems to be dependent on the material used, treatment modality and also on the filler particle size. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4760024/ /pubmed/26957802 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173208 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nair, Veena S
Sainudeen, Shan
Padmanabhan, Prabeesh
Vijayashankar, L V
Sujathan, Unu
Pillai, Rajesh
Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title_full Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title_fullStr Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title_full_unstemmed Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title_short Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
title_sort three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4760024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26957802
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.173208
work_keys_str_mv AT nairveenas threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing
AT sainudeenshan threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing
AT padmanabhanprabeesh threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing
AT vijayashankarlv threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing
AT sujathanunu threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing
AT pillairajesh threedimensionalevaluationofsurfaceroughnessofresincompositesafterfinishingandpolishing