The Effect of Finishing and Polishing Sequences on The Surface Roughness of Three Different Nanocomposites and Composite/Enamel and Composite/Cementum Interfaces

Ksenia Babina,Inna Sokhova,Vladlena Doroshina,Maria Polyakova,Marianna Arakelyan,Nina Novozhilova

doi:10.3390/nano10071339

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of final surface treatment and dental composite type on the roughness of the composite surface, composite/enamel interface, and composite/cementum interface, as well as on the polishing time. Class V cavities prepared in extracted teeth (n = 126) were restored using one of the three nanohybrid composites with different filler sizes. The specimens were randomly assigned to three different finishing and polishing sequences. The roughness (Ra) of the investigated surfaces was measured using the contact profilometer. The time required to achieve visible gloss was documented. The data were analyzed using ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test (p < 0.05). There was no significant influence of the composite type on the restoration surface roughness (p = 0.088), while the polishing method had a significant impact (p < 0.001). The Ra of the composites ranged between 0.08 µm and 0.29 µm, with the lowest values (0.09 µm ± 0.05 µm) found in the aluminum oxide disc group (p < 0.001). The time to achieve a visible composite gloss was influenced by the polishing method, composite type, and interactions between these factors (p < 0.001). The interface roughness was significantly greater than that of the composite surface (p < 0.001), and depended on the composite type and polishing system employed.

Highlights

Nanotechnology applications in dentistry have shown constantly increasing interest, with a high number of studies on the topic
The tested null hypotheses were that there would be no differences in surface roughness and polishing time: (1) among the composite resins treated using different polishing sequences; (2) among the three polishing sequences for each composite resin; and (3) surface roughness among the investigated surfaces, i.e., the composite surface, composite/enamel interface, and composite/cementum interface
The tested hypotheses were as follows: there would be no differences in surface roughness and polishing time (1) among the composite resins treated using different polishing sequences; (2) among the three polishing sequences for each composite resin; and (3) surface roughness among the investigated surfaces, i.e., the composite surface, composite/enamel interface, and composite/cementum interface

Summary

Introduction

Nanotechnology applications in dentistry have shown constantly increasing interest, with a high number of studies on the topic. Nanocomposites are the most commonly used restorative materials in dentistry, due to their excellent mechanical characteristics [1], stable physicochemical assessment potential [2], high flexural properties [3], and potential remineralizing capabilities [4]. On the contrary, can enhance bacterial adhesion, decrease the wear resistance of the restoration [10,11], and cause irritation of the tongue, lips, and cheeks [12] Another crucial factor for achieving predictable results is marginal finishing [13] since plaque accumulation around the restoration margins may lead to restoration failure [14]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion