Cargando…
Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite
Insufficient dental restoration finishing and polishing may lead to plaque accumulation, gingival inflammation, staining, caries, and esthetic impairment. Here, the effect of two finishing and polishing systems on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion were evaluated. Two finishing and polishing k...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9657816/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36363005 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15217415 |
_version_ | 1784829791386468352 |
---|---|
author | Pietrokovski, Yoav Zeituni, Dan Schwartz, Adi Beyth, Nurit |
author_facet | Pietrokovski, Yoav Zeituni, Dan Schwartz, Adi Beyth, Nurit |
author_sort | Pietrokovski, Yoav |
collection | PubMed |
description | Insufficient dental restoration finishing and polishing may lead to plaque accumulation, gingival inflammation, staining, caries, and esthetic impairment. Here, the effect of two finishing and polishing systems on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion were evaluated. Two finishing and polishing kits were evaluated: diamond burs (Shine 1-2, Strauss & Co, Raanana, Israel) and paper discs (Sof-Lex 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) (n = 30 each). For each group surface roughness was evaluated using an optical profilometer (Contour GT-K1, Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) (n = 10). Surface bacteria were evaluated for biofilm biomass using crystal violet (CV) staining (absorbance measured at 538 nm) and viable counts (CFU/mL) (n = 20). The control group included polymerized discs against a Mylar strip (n = 30). Student’s t test and one-way ANOVA were used for statistical evaluation. Diamond burs, paper discs, and control average surface RA were 169.4 ± 45.2 µ, 364 ± 77.7 µ, and 121.2 ± 18.1 µ, respectively. There was a significant difference found between all groups (p < 0.00001). Bacterial biomass on diamond burs, paper discs, and control samples were 0.458 ± 0.161, 0.507 ± 0.139, and 0.446 ± 0.142, respectively (p = 0.257). Viable bacterial counts (CFU/mL) on diamond burs, paper discs, and control samples were 2.25 × 10(4), 2.95 × 10(4), and 2.75 × 10(4), respectively (p = 0.856). A comparison between two finishing and polishing kits showed that the shine 1–2 diamond bur kit produced a smoother surface than the polishing disc kit. No differences were found in the biofilm biomass quantification and bacterial viable count between the groups. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9657816 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96578162022-11-15 Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite Pietrokovski, Yoav Zeituni, Dan Schwartz, Adi Beyth, Nurit Materials (Basel) Article Insufficient dental restoration finishing and polishing may lead to plaque accumulation, gingival inflammation, staining, caries, and esthetic impairment. Here, the effect of two finishing and polishing systems on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion were evaluated. Two finishing and polishing kits were evaluated: diamond burs (Shine 1-2, Strauss & Co, Raanana, Israel) and paper discs (Sof-Lex 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) (n = 30 each). For each group surface roughness was evaluated using an optical profilometer (Contour GT-K1, Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) (n = 10). Surface bacteria were evaluated for biofilm biomass using crystal violet (CV) staining (absorbance measured at 538 nm) and viable counts (CFU/mL) (n = 20). The control group included polymerized discs against a Mylar strip (n = 30). Student’s t test and one-way ANOVA were used for statistical evaluation. Diamond burs, paper discs, and control average surface RA were 169.4 ± 45.2 µ, 364 ± 77.7 µ, and 121.2 ± 18.1 µ, respectively. There was a significant difference found between all groups (p < 0.00001). Bacterial biomass on diamond burs, paper discs, and control samples were 0.458 ± 0.161, 0.507 ± 0.139, and 0.446 ± 0.142, respectively (p = 0.257). Viable bacterial counts (CFU/mL) on diamond burs, paper discs, and control samples were 2.25 × 10(4), 2.95 × 10(4), and 2.75 × 10(4), respectively (p = 0.856). A comparison between two finishing and polishing kits showed that the shine 1–2 diamond bur kit produced a smoother surface than the polishing disc kit. No differences were found in the biofilm biomass quantification and bacterial viable count between the groups. MDPI 2022-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9657816/ /pubmed/36363005 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15217415 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Pietrokovski, Yoav Zeituni, Dan Schwartz, Adi Beyth, Nurit Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title | Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title_full | Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title_short | Comparison of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Bacterial Adhesion of Resin Composite |
title_sort | comparison of different finishing and polishing systems on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of resin composite |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9657816/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36363005 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15217415 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pietrokovskiyoav comparisonofdifferentfinishingandpolishingsystemsonsurfaceroughnessandbacterialadhesionofresincomposite AT zeitunidan comparisonofdifferentfinishingandpolishingsystemsonsurfaceroughnessandbacterialadhesionofresincomposite AT schwartzadi comparisonofdifferentfinishingandpolishingsystemsonsurfaceroughnessandbacterialadhesionofresincomposite AT beythnurit comparisonofdifferentfinishingandpolishingsystemsonsurfaceroughnessandbacterialadhesionofresincomposite |