Article_5_2_2
RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
Original Article
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
Irina Nica1a, Simona Stoleriu1b*, Gianina Iovan1c, Cristina-Angela Ghiorghe1d, Galina Pancu1e, Adriana Munteanu2f,
Sorin Andrian1g
1
Department of Odontology - Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy,
Jassy, Romania
2
Department of Machine Tools, Faculty of Machine Manufacturing and Industrial Management, “Gheorghe Asachi”Technical University, Jassy, Romania
a
DDS, PhD, Assistant Professor
DDS, PhD, Associated Professor
b,c,f
d,e
DDS, PhD, Lecturer
g
DDS, PhD, Professor
ABSTRACT DOI: 10.25241/stomaeduj.2018.5(2).art.2
Introduction: One of the main objectives of composite restorations procedure is to obtain OPEN ACCESS This is an Open
a smooth surface for aesthetic reasons and for oral health. Access article under the CC BY-NC
4.0 license.
The aim of this study was to assess the surface morphology of a bulk fill composite material Peer-Reviewed Article
after finishing and polishing with three different finishing and polishing systems.
Citation: Nica I, Stoleriu S, Iovan G, Ghior-
Materials and methods: Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior composite resin was chosen for this ghe C-A, Pancu G, Munteanu A, Andrian S.
study (3M ESPE St. Paul, MN, USA). Twenty cylindrical samples 5 mm in diameter and 2 mm Comparative study regarding the effect of
different finishing and polishing systems on
thick were made using plastic molds. They were randomly and equally assigned to four a bulk-fill composite resin surface. Stoma
groups. In group 1 (control) the samples were not subjected to finishing and polishing Edu J. 2018;5(2):92-97.
procedure. In study groups 2-4, the samples were finished using two tungsten carbide burs Academic Editor: Jean-François Roulet,
DDS, PhD, Prof hc, Professor, University of
and then polished using one step Occlubrush system (KerrHawe SA, Switzerland) - group Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
2, with the two step Sof-Lex system (3M ESPE) - group 3, and with the multi-step Super
Received: May 15, 2018
Snap system (Shofu, Inc. Kyoto, Japan) - group 4. The surface characteristics of the samples Revised: May 28, 2018
were quantitatively analyzed using profilometry and qualitatively evaluated by scanning Acccepted: June 08, 2018
Published: June 11, 2018
electron microscopy. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test was used to determine the
distribution of data in groups. ANOVA and Tukey post hoc statistical tests were used to *Corresponding author: Assoc.
Professor Stoleriu Simona, DDS, PhD
compare the results in groups. Department of Odontology - Periodontology
Results: Finishing with tungsten carbide burs and two-steps Sof-Lex polishing system and and Fixed Prosthodontics Faculty of Dental
Medicine, „Grigore. T. Popa” University of
one-step polishing system Occlubrush determined, higher roughness when comparing to Medicine and Pharmacy 16, Universității
Street, RO-700115 Jassy, Romania Tel/Fax:
multi-step Super Snap system. +40232301618, e-mail: stoleriu_simona@
Conclusion: The surface characteristics of the studied composite resin were influenced by yahoo.com
the type of finishing and polishing system used. Copyright: © 2018 the Editorial Council
Keywords: bulk-fill composite, finishing and polishing systems, profilometry, SEM. for the Stomatology Edu Journal.
1. Introduction of the particles from which it is made and all these in
Finishing and polishing are mandatory steps in direct relation to the structure of the composite material [6-8].
restoration using composite resins. Obtaining a smooth Aim The purpose of the present study was to evaluate
surface has always been one of the main objectives of the surface characteristics of a bulk fill composite resin
composite restorations, not only for aesthetic reasons used for direct restoration when different types of
but also for maintaining oral health [1]. finishing and polishing systems were used. The surface
It is considered that the surface roughness that leads microstructure was qualitatively evaluated by scanning
to bacterial plaque retention is 0.2 μm [2]. Surface electron microscopy (SEM) and quantitatively assessed
roughness higher than this value makes the adherence by surface roughness determination using profilometry.
of bacteria from the oral environment impossible to
prevent. In time, biofilm accumulation is responsible
for the decreased wear resistance of the restoration, 2. Materials and Methods
increased risk of caries adjacent to restoration and The material used in the present study was Filtek Bulk
periodontal inflammation. Surface roughness also Fill Posterior Restorative (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA).
influences the retention rate of extrinsic pigments and Lot: N720858, shade A3. It was designed to be easily
the aesthetic aspect of the restoration [3-5]. and quickly applied in layers of 5 mm thickness, and it
A wide range of instruments can be used to finish and can remain exposed to occlusal forces.
polish direct restoration, such as carbide or diamond The organic matrix of the Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior
finishing burs, rubber based abrasives, aluminium oxide Restorative composite contains two new methacrylic
particle discs, abrasive strips and polishing pastes. The monomers, which act synergistically to reduce the
action of each instrument determines different values polymerization shrinkage. One of the monomers is
of roughness by the degree of flexibility of the substrate a high molecular weight aromatic dimethacrylate
on which the abrasive powder is impregnated, by the (AUDM), which modulates the volumetric contraction.
hardness of the abrasive powder and by the diameter The second innovative monomer is actually a class of
92 Stoma Edu J. 2018;5(2): 92-97 http://www.stomaeduj.com
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
compounds called adhesion-fragmentation monomers
Original Article
Table 1. Details about tested material
(AFM) that contributes to the release of polymerization
Material/ Chemical composition
stress while maintaining the physical properties Manufacturer/
of the newly created polymer chains. The organic Type/ Filler Load: 76.5 wt% / 58.4 vol%
component also contains DDDMA (1,12-dodecanediol Batch No./ Matrix
dimethacrylate) which provides low resin viscosity, Shade Type Size
decreasing exothermic reactions and polymerization Filtek Bulk Non-agglomerated/
20
shrinkage, and UDMA (urethane dimethacrylate), an Fill Universal
bis-GMA,
non-aggregated silica
nm
increased molecular weight monomer, that reduces Restorative
AUDM,
particles
resin viscosity and polymerization shrinkage. 3MESPE, AFM, Non-agglomerated/
4 - 11
The inorganic component of Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior St.Paul, MN, DDDMA non-aggregated zirconia
nm
Restorative consists in a combination of non- USA UDMA, particles
agglomerated/non-aggregated silica particles of 20 TEGDMA,
Clusters of aggregated
bis-
nm, non-agglomerated/non-aggregated zirconia N720858/ A3 EMA(6)
silica and zirconia particles 100
particles with sizes ranging from 4 to 11 nm, respectively Ytterbium trifluoride nm
zirconia/silica clusters (containing 20 nm silica particles aggregate particles
and 4 to 11 nm zirconia particles). Bis-GMA: Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate; AUDM:
The inorganic component also includes ytterbium aromatic dimethacrylate; AFM: adhesion-fragmentation monomers;
DDDMA: 1,12-dodecanediol dimethacrylate; UDMA: urethane
trifluoride aggregate particles of 100 nm (YbF3), which dimethacrylate; TEGDMA: Triethyleneglycoldimethacrylate; bis
have the role of increasing radiopacity of the material. EMA(6): ethoxylated bisphenol-A dimethacrylate.
The total inorganic phase loading is about 76.5% (by
weight), equivalent to 58.4% (by volume). Details water cooling, at speed of 20,000 r.p.m. according to
about composite resins type, producer and chemical the manufacturer's specifications.
composition are presented in Table 1. In group 4, samples were contoured and finished
Twenty cylindrical samples 5 mm in diameter and 2 mm using the H135Q and H135UF burs (Komet Dental/
thick were made using plastic moulds The conformers Gebr Brasseler GmbH & Co. KG, Germany). Subsequent
were placed in tight contact with a celluloid matrix polishing was performed with the multi-step Super Snap
between two glass plates, in order to obtain a smooth, System (Shofu, Inc. Kyoto, Japan). This system consists
flat and a surface free of pores. The samples were light- of discs for contouring, finishing, polishing and super-
cured for 40 s on both sides through glass plate to polishing. The discs are manufactured without a metallic
ensure complete polymerization of the material, using ring, do not expose the mandrel to the active surface,
a light emitting diode light curing device (Optilight LD and they are impregnated with aluminium oxide powder
MAX –Gnatus) heaving a wavelength of 470 nm to 480 of different grain size. For the present study, the purple
nm, a maximum power of 600 mW/cm2 and providing finishing discs, the green polish and the pink ones for
a polymerization depth of up to 3 mm. After removing super-polish were used successively. Each abrasive disc
samples from moulds they were randomly divided into was used once for each sample, without water spraying,
4 groups. Samples from group 1 (control), were not without paste, for 30 seconds and the hand-piece was
finished or polished and the samples in groups 2-4, were used at a speed of 10,000-20,000 rpm.
finished and polished using three different systems. Finally, the samples were cleaned from the debris
In group 2, samples were firstly contoured and finished by washing with distilled water and dried with air.
using tungsten carbide burs from Komet Dental/Gebr Subsequently, they were subjected to qualitative
Brasseler GmbH & Co. KG, Germany in the following surface evaluation using the scanning electron
order: for the coarse finishing step (cut-off) the microscope VEGA II LSH TESCAN (Czech Republic)
H135Q bur, batch 906561 was used and for ultra-fine and to quantitative profilometric analysis using a
finishing (contouring) the H135UF bur, batch 903481 profilometer Taylor Hobson-Surtronic 25 (Ametek
(ISO 500314166031014) was used. Each bur was used Inc, Berwyn, PA, USA). Ten traces were registered in
for 30 seconds, at 20,000 rpm and under continuous different areas with a tip load of 0.75 mN, a tip diameter
water cooling. Burs were driven in one direction, of 10 µm, a trace length of 0.25 mm, a scanning speed
clockwise. Subsequent polishing was performed with of 0.5 mm/s and a cut-off length of 0.8 μm.
a one-step polishing system Occlubrush (KerrHawe The roughness parameters were calculated and the
SA, Switzerland) made of polycarbonate fibers mean arithmetic deviation, Ra, of the assessed profile
impregnated with silicon carbide particles. The small was used. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test was
cup brushes were used at 5000 rpm, for 30 seconds and used to determine the distribution of data in groups.
without polishing paste. ANOVA and Tukey post hoc statistical tests were used
In group 3, samples were contoured and finished to compare the results in groups.
using the H135Q and H135UF carbide burs (Komet
Dental/Gebr Brasseler GmbH & Co. KG, Germany).
The polishing was done with a two-step polishing 3. Results
system Sof-Lex (3M ESPE). This system is made up of Some SEM surface images at different magnification with
disposable spiral wheels for finishing (the beige one) morphological aspects of Filtek Bulk Fill composite resin
and polishing (the white one). The lamellar discs are samples in groups 1-4 are presented in Fig. 1. In group 1
made of a thermoplastic elastomer impregnated with – Fig. 1a) (control samples), very rare micro-voids may be
aluminium oxide particles. Each lamellar disk was used observed in small magnification (500 ×), which can be
once for each sample, for 30 seconds, without paste or inferred as arising from the sample preparation technique,
Stomatology Edu Journal 93
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
Original Article 500 x 2000 x
a) Group 1
b) Group 2
c) Group 3
d) Group 4
Figure 1. SEM surface images of Filtek Bulk Fill composite resin at different magnification: a) control group, b-d) after finishing with the three finishing
and polishing systems.
94 Stoma Edu J. 2018;5(2): 92-97 http://www.stomaeduj.com
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
larger particles of silica and zirconia. The appearance of
Original Article
the surface seems compact, revealing a close adhesion
between the organic matrix and the inorganic load.
For group 2 – Fig. 1b), the microstructure presents
many parallel micro-channels 1 micrometer wide and
a 10 micrometers mean distances between them. It is
observed that the very fine particles on the surface and
matrix elements were removed by abrasion, leaving
large clusters with the diameter up to 5 µm to be visible.
Similar aspects are also observed in group 3 – Fig. 1c), but
the micro-channels formed appear more accentuated
Figure 2. Mean values of Ra parameter of Filtek Bulk Fill in control group and closer when compared to group 2. In group 4, the
and after finishing and polishing. analyzed surface microstructure – Fig. 1d) indicates similar
aspects, but the micro-channels are finer and rarer when
compared to the samples from previous groups.
The mean Ra and Rz values obtained by quantitative
assessment of samples surface using profilometry are
represented in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, respectively. The lowest
Ra (0.023 µm) and Rz (0.181 µm) values were obtained
in group 1. In group 2, increased Ra and Rz values were
found (Ra mean value of 0.211 µm and mean Rz value
of 1.308 µm). In group 3 the same increase in the Ra
and Rz mean values was observed (Ra of 0.229 µm and
Figure 3. Mean values of Rz parameter of Filtek Bulk Fill in control group Rz of 1.448 µm). In group 4 the mean Ra (0.098 µm) and
and after finishing and polishing. Rz (0.798 µm) values were much lower when compared
to groups 2 and 3, but higher than the control samples.
Table 2. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test result. The result of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality
test showed that in all groups the data were normal
distributed (p = 0.250 > 0.05) (Table 2). In order to
compare the results in groups, ANOVA and Tukey
post hoc statistical tests were used (Table 3 and 4,
respectively).
Significant results were obtained when comparing Ra
values in groups 2, 3, and 4 to group 1 (p < 0.05, Table
4). Also, statistically significant results were obtained
when comparing the surface roughness in group 2 to
group 4 and in group 3 to group 4. The results in group
2 were not statistically significant when compared to
Table 3. ANOVA statistical test result. group 3 (p > 0.05, Table 4).
4. Discussion
The type of inorganic filler of the material can influence
the handling characteristic and the final surface aspect
after finishing and polishing procedure. Some in vitro
Table 4. Tukey post hoc statistical test result. studies revealed that a number of other factors may
influence the surface condition of the material, such as
the type of finishing and polishing system: in one step or
several steps [9,10]. It is a lack of consensual opinion in the
literature regarding the effect of one step or multi-steps
polishing system on composite resins surface roughness.
It has been demonstrated that multi-step systems
determined smoother surfaces than two-step systems
or one-step systems [11]. On the other hand, some other
studies showed that there are no significant differences
between one-step and multi-step systems [12].
In the present study, the surface roughness of control
samples was lower when compared to the results
obtained for each of the three finishing and polishing
rather than from the polymerization shrinkage. At this systems used. These results are in agreement with a
magnification, the surface of control samples appears series of studies which have shown that the smoothest
to be much smoother compared to the other samples. composite resin surface is obtained when the material
At larger magnifications (2000 ×) very small particles is light-cured in tight contact with a celluloid matrix [13-
can be identified, not aggregated, distributed among 15]. The superficial layer, polymerized in contact with
Stomatology Edu Journal 95
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
the celluloid matrix has a higher organic content than roughness than t multi-step Super Snap system.
Original Article the underlying layer [16-18] and the removal of this 4. The surface characteristics of the studied composite
layer by finishing and polishing procedure will increase resin were influenced by the type of finishing and
the surface resistance of the material [19,20]. However, polishing system used.
the anatomical contour of the restoration is rarely
achieved only by the use of the celluloid matrix [21,22],
so most of the time it is necessary to use the finishing Author contributions
and polishing instruments to remove the material in Equal contribution to the paper.
excess and to obtain the shape and the appearance of
the restoration closer to the natural tooth.
In order to be effective, a finishing system has to contain Acknowledgement
abrasive particles with higher hardness than the inorganic Not applicable. The study was self-funded.
filler particles of the composite. Otherwise, during the
finishing and polishing steps, the resin-rich superficial layer
(which has poor physical and mechanical properties) will References
be removed, and the filler particles will remain into bold 1. Raj R, Gupta R. In vitro evaluation of the effect of two finishing and
polishing systems on four esthetic restorative materials. J Conserv
relief on the surface layer [23,24]. Composites containing Dent. 2013;16(6):564-567. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.120946.
small filler particles will provide after finishing and [Full text links] [Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(20)
Scopus(10)
polishing a smoother surface than the ones containing 2. Yap AU, Yap SH, Teo CK, Ng JJ. Comparison of surface finish of new
larger-sized filler particles [25,26]. aesthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2004;29(1):100-104.
It was demonstrated that a composite surface [PubMed] Google Scholar(110) Scopus(47)
3. Stoleriu S, Iovan G, Pancu G, Nica I, Andrian S. Study concerning
roughness higher than 0.2 μm will prone the composite the influence of the finishing and polishing systems on the
surface to bacterial plaque retention, increased surface state of various types of composite resins. Rom J Oral
Rehab. 2013;5(3):78-83.
risk for secondary caries onset and for periodontal Google Scholar(2)
inflammation, and will affect the aesthetic aspect and 4. Erdemir U, Sancakli HS, Yildiz E. The effect of one-step and
the longevity of the restoration [27]. Some studies multi-step polishing systems on the surface roughness
and microhardness of novel resin composites. Eur J Dent.
have shown that many of the finishing and polishing 2012;6(2):198-205.
systems on the market lead to a smooth surface, with [Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(41) Scopus(17)
5. Nica I, Stoleriu S, Iovan G, Pancu G, Andrian S. Fractal analysis of
mean Ra values varying from 0.02 μm to 0.56 μm [28, some restorative Nano-filled composite materials microstructure.
29]. In our study using tungsten carbide burs with the Stoma Edu J. 2015;2(1):36-43.
one-step polishing system Occlubrush and tungsten Google Scholar(2)
6. Takanashi E, Kishikawa R, Ikeda M, et al. Influence of abrasive
carbide burs with the two-step Sof-Lex finishing system particle size on surface properties of flowable composites. Dent
determined the Ra mean value to slightly increase over Mater J. 2008;27(6):780-786.
[Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(24) Scopus(16)
0.2 μm. When using tungsten carbide burs and the 7. Yazici AR, Muftu A. Three dimensional surface profile analysis of
multi-step Super Snap system, the mean Ra value was different types of flowable restorative resins following different
lower than 0.2 μm. We can assume that the effect of the finishing protocols. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2007;8(5):1-11.
[PubMed] Google Scholar(20) Scopus(9)
finishing and polishing protocol used in this study had 8. Attar N. The effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the
a notable clinical significance. surface roughness of composite resin materials. J Contemp Dent
Pract. 2007;8(1):27-35.
The complex surface structure of a composite [PubMed] Google Scholar(119) Scopus(51)
resin cannot be fully characterized only by using 9. Jefferies SR. Abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative
profilometry. A clear prediction of clinical performance dentistry: a state of art review. Dent Clin North Am.
2007;51(2):379-397, ix. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2006.12.002
of a restorative material can be made by correlating [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(135) Scopus(51)
the roughness parameters calculated by the profile 10. Efreifej NS, Oweis YG, Eliades G. The effect of polishing technique
on 3-D surface roughness and gloss of dental restorative resin
geometry with the morphological surface analysis by composites. Oper Dent. 2013;38(1):9-20.
scanning electron microscopy, which allows assessing [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(26) Scopus(15)
the destructive potential of different finishing and 11. Jung M, Sehr K, Klimek J. Surface texture of four nanofilled and
one hybrid composite after finishing. Oper Dent. 2007;32(1):45-
polishing systems [30,31]. Since the quality of the final 52. doi: 10.2341/06-9.
restoration surface is influenced by the type of the [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(107) Scopus(48)
12. Yap AU, Mok BY. Surface finish of a new hybrid aesthetic
instrument used for finishing and polishing and also restorative material. Oper Dent. 2002;27(2):161-166.
by the material structure, choosing the most suitable [PubMed] Google Scholar(75) Scopus(45)
instrument for a specific material seems to become of 13. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Kulunk S, Ural C, Kulunk T. The effect of polishing
techniques on the surface roughness and color change of
great clinical importance. composite resins. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96(1):33-40. doi: 10.1016/j.
prosdent.2006.04.012
[Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(173) Scopus(67)
14. Uctasli MB, Bala O, Gull A. Surface roughness of flowable and
5. Conclusion packable composite resin materials after finishing with abrasive
1. For Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (3M ESPE), the smoothest disc. J Oral Rehabil. 2004;31(12):1197-2002. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2842.2004.01341.x
surface was obtained when the material was placed in [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(54) Scopus(24)
direct contact with the celluloid matrix. 15. Endo T, Finger WJ, Kanehira M, Utterodt A, Komatsu M. Surface
texture and roughness of polished nanofill and nanohybrid resin
2. The use of tungsten carbide burs followed by multi- composites. Dent Mater J. 2010;29(2):213-223.
step Super Snap finishing system determined a lower [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(82) Scopus(34)
surface roughness than with the other polishing systems. 16. Grădinaru I, Ignat L, Dascălu CG, Soroaga LV, Antohe ME. Studies
regarding the architectural design of various composites and
3. Finishing with tungsten carbide burs and two-steps nanofibres used in dental medicine. Rev Chim.(Bucharest).
Sof-Lex polishing system and one-step polishing system 2018;69(2):328-331.
Google Scholar(0) Scopus(0)
Occlubrush determined, significantly higher surface
96 Stoma Edu J. 2018;5(2): 92-97 http://www.stomaeduj.com
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
17. Joniot SB, Gregoire GL, Auther AM, Roques YM. Three- 24. Schmidlin PR, Göhring TN. Finishing tooth-colored restorations
Original Article
dimensional optical perfilometry analysis of surface states in vitro: an index of surface alteration and finish-line destruction.
obtained after finishing sequences for three composite resins. Oper Dent. 2004;29(1):80-86.
Oper Dent. 2000;25(4):311-315. [PubMed] Google Scholar(30) Scopus(15)
[PubMed] Google Scholar(87) 25. Baciu ER, Ben Amor H, Calamaz D, Baciu M, Grădinaru I. Study
18. Pettini F, Corsalini M, Savino MG, et al. Roughness analysis on regarding the profile of finished surfaces of some direct
composite materials (Microfilled, Nanofilled and Silorane) after composite resins. Rom J Oral Rehab. 2016;8(3):19-25.
different finishing and polishing procedures. Open Dent J. Google Scholar(0)
2015;9:357-367. doi: 10.2174/1874210601509010357. eCollection 26. Patel B, Chhabra N, Jain D. Effect of different polishing systems
2015. on the surface roughness of nano-hybrid composites. J Conserv
[Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(7) Scopus(3) Dent. 2016;19(1):37-40. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.173192.
19. Chinelatti MA, Thomazatti Chimello D, Pereira Ramos R, Palma- [Full text links] [Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(4)
Dibb RG. Evaluation of the surface hardness of composite resins Scopus(3)
before and after polishing at different times. J Appl Oral Sci. 27. Kakaboura A, Fragouli M, Rahiotis C, Silikas N.Evaluation of surface
2006;14(3):188-192. characteristics of dental composites using profilometry, scanning
[Full text links] [Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(25) electron, atomic force microscopy and gloss-meter. J Mater Sci
Scopus(11) Mater Med. 2007;18(1):155-163. doi: 10.1007/s10856-006-0675-8
20. Kumari CM, Bhat KM, Bansal R. Evaluation of surface roughness of [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(162) Scopus(86)
different restorative composites after polishing using atomic force 28. Baroudi K, Rodrigues JC. Flowable resin composites: a
microscopy. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19(1):56-62. systematic review and clinical considerations. J Clin Diagn Res.
[Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(7) Scopus(7) 2015;9(6):ZE18-24. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/12294.6129.
21. Venturini D, Cenci MS, Demarco FF, Camacho GB, Powers JM. [Free PMC Article] [PubMed] Google Scholar(28) Scopus(6)
Effect of polishing techniques and time on surface roughness, 29. Baseren M. Surface roughness of nanofill and nanohybrid
hardness and microleakage of resin composite restorations. Oper composite resin and ormocer-based tooth-colored
Dent. 2006;31(1):11-17. doi: 10.2341/04-155 restorative materials after several finishing and polishing
[Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(116) Scopus(51) procedures. J Biomater Appl. 2004;19(2):121-134. doi:
22. Bittencourt Berger S, Muniz Palialol AR, Cavalli V, Giannini M. 10.1177/0885328204044011
Surface roughness and staining susceptibility of composite resins [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(144) Scopus(69)
after finishing and polishing. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2011;23(1):34- 30. Ergücü Z, Türkün LS. Surface roughness of novel resin composites
43. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00376.x. polished with one-step systems. Oper Dent. 2007;32(2):185-192.
[Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(57) doi: 10.2341/06-56
23. Balan A, Sandu AV, Stoleriu S, Pintiliciuc VS, Toma V. Effect [Full text links] [PubMed] Google Scholar(107) Scopus(51)
of different finishing and polishing systems on the surface 31. Uctasli MB, Arisu HD, Omürlü H, et al. The effect of different
roughness of composite resins. Rev Mat Plast. 2015;52(1):55-57. finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness of
Google Scholar(4) Scopus(10) different composite restorative materials. J Contemp Dent Pract.
2007;8(2):89-96.
[PubMed] Google Scholar(57) Scopus(18)
Irina NICA
DMD, MSc, PhD, Assistant Professor
Department of Odontology - Periodontology and Fixed Prosthodontics
Faculty of Dental Medicine, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy
Jassy, Romania
CV
Doctor Irina Nica is Assistant Professor of Cariology and Operative Dentistry at the Faculty of Dental Medicine, “Gr. T. Popa”
University of Medicine and Pharmacy Jassy, Romania. She graduated from the Faculty of Stomatology of the “Gr. T. Popa”
University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Jassy (2001). She is a Board Certified Physician in the specialty “General Stomatology”
(2005). In 2012 she obtained her PhD title in medical sciences with a thesis entitled “Theoretical and experimental contributions
to nanomaterials usage in dental medicine”. Her main research field is Restorative Dentistry.
Questions
1. A smooth surface of the composite restoration is very important for:
qa. Preventing biofilm accumulation;
qb. Maintaining oral health;
qc. Preventing external staining;
qd. All the previous answers are correct.
2. The two steps polishing system used in the present study was:
qa. Tungsten Carbide Burs H135Q and H135UF (Komet Dental/Gebr Brasseler GmbH & Co. KG, Germany);
qb. Occlubrush system (KerrHawe SA, Switzerland);
qc. Sof-Lex system (3M ESPE);
qd. Super Snap system (Shofu, Inc. Kyoto, Japan).
3. The action of the instrument used for finishing and polishing determines
different values of roughness parameters by:
qa. The hardness of the abrasive powder;
qb. The diameter of the particles from which it is made;
qc. The flexibility of the substrate on which the abrasive powder is impregnated;
qd. All the previous answers are correct.
4. The surface microstructure of Filtek Bulk Fill composite was evaluated:
qa. Qualitatively by AFM (Atomic Force Microscopy);
qb. Quantitatively by Profilometry;
qc. Qualitatively by MO (Optical Microscopy);
qd. Quantitatively by SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy).
Stomatology Edu Journal 97