Abstract
Background: In this study, we assess the effect produced on roughness and gloss of full-body bulk-fill materials by different finishing and polishing systems. Methods: Four full-body bulk-fill materials were tested: SonicFill2 (SF), Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative (FB), Tetric EvoCeram bulk-fill (EC), and Fill-Up! (FU). Sixty discs per material (2 mm in thickness and 7 mm in diameter) were obtained and randomly assigned (n = 15) to four finishing and polishing methods: Sof-Lex Spiral Wheels (SW), HiLusterPLUS (HL), Astropol (AP), and Opti1Step (OS). Surface roughness and gloss were then measured. Results: For roughness, material and surface treatment were significant factors (p < 0.001) with SF = FB = EC < FU and AP < SW < HL = OS. Material and surface treatment had a significant effect also on gloss (p < 0.001), with SF > FB = EC > FU and SW > AP > HL > OS. Conclusions: The tested combinations of bulk-fill and polishing systems provided clinically acceptable results with regard to roughness, while the outcome was poor for gloss. Multistep finishing/polishing systems were able to produce smoother surfaces on full-body bulk-fill materials compared to simplified ones.
Highlights
Resin composites (RCs) are widely used for anterior and posterior restorations, owing to their ability to mimic mechanical and optical properties of the natural tooth
Concerning the finishing/polishing system, it emerged from post hoc comparisons that, regardless of the material type, AP yielded the lowest roughness, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05); Spiral Wheels (SW) produced a significantly lower roughness than HL and OS (p < 0.05)
This was considered redundant, as the study was aimed at comparing different finishing/polishing systems on several available full-body bulk-fill materials and the comparative assessment of roughness and gloss was made with reference to threshold values of these properties that have been reported in the literature [24,25]
Summary
Resin composites (RCs) are widely used for anterior and posterior restorations, owing to their ability to mimic mechanical and optical properties of the natural tooth. The first developed bulk-fill resin composites were meant as base materials to be capped with a conventional resin composite as the occlusal layer. This original category of bulk-fill composites has been classified as “base” [4] or “low viscosity” [5]. Bulk-fill composites with a higher filler load have been introduced as one-step materials that do not require an occlusal capping. This newer category has been classified as “full-body” [4] or “high viscosity” [5].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
