StomatologyEduJ 5(1) SEJ_5_2_site | Page 28

RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY
COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT FINISHING AND
POLISHING SYSTEMS ON A BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESIN SURFACE
Irina Nica 1a , Simona Stoleriu 1b* , Gianina Iovan 1c , Cristina-Angela Ghiorghe 1d , Galina Pancu 1e , Adriana Munteanu 2f ,
Sorin Andrian 1g
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
1
DDS, PhD, Assistant Professor
DDS, PhD, Associated Professor
d,e
DDS, PhD, Lecturer
g
DDS, PhD, Professor
a
b,c,f
ABSTRACT
DOI: 10.25241/stomaeduj.2018.5(2).art.2
Introduction: One of the main objectives of composite restorations procedure is to obtain
a smooth surface for aesthetic reasons and for oral health.
The aim of this study was to assess the surface morphology of a bulk fill composite material
after finishing and polishing with three different finishing and polishing systems.
Materials and methods: Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior composite resin was chosen for this
study (3M ESPE St. Paul, MN, USA). Twenty cylindrical samples 5 mm in diameter and 2 mm
thick were made using plastic molds. They were randomly and equally assigned to four
groups. In group 1 (control) the samples were not subjected to finishing and polishing
procedure. In study groups 2-4, the samples were finished using two tungsten carbide burs
and then polished using one step Occlubrush system (KerrHawe SA, Switzerland) - group
2, with the two step Sof-Lex system (3M ESPE) - group 3, and with the multi-step Super
Snap system (Shofu, Inc. Kyoto, Japan) - group 4. The surface characteristics of the samples
were quantitatively analyzed using profilometry and qualitatively evaluated by scanning
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
compare the results in groups.
Results: Finishing with tungsten carbide burs and two-steps Sof-Lex polishing system and
one-step polishing system Occlubrush determined, higher roughness when comparing to
multi-step Super Snap system.
Conclusion: The surface characteristics of the studied composite resin were influenced by
the type of finishing and polishing system used.
Keywords: bulk-fill composite, finishing and polishing systems, profilometry, SEM.
1. Introduction
Finishing and polishing are mandatory steps in direct
restoration using composite resins. Obtaining a smooth
surface has always been one of the main objectives of
composite restorations, not only for aesthetic reasons
but also for maintaining oral health [1].
It is considered that the surface roughness that leads
to bacterial plaque retention is 0.2 μm [2]. Surface
roughness higher than this value makes the adherence
of bacteria from the oral environment impossible to
prevent. In time, biofilm accumulation is responsible
for the decreased wear resistance of the restoration,
increased risk of caries adjacent to restoratio n and
periodontal inflammation. Surface roughness also
influences the retention rate of extrinsic pigments and
the aesthetic aspect of the restoration [3-5].
A wide range of instruments can be used to finish and
polish direct restoration, such as carbide or diamond
finishing burs, rubber based abrasives, aluminium oxide
particle discs, abrasive strips and polishing pastes. The
action of each instrument determines different values
of roughness by the degree of flexibility of the substrate
on which the abrasive powder is impregnated, by the
hardness of the abrasive powder and by the diameter
92
OPEN ACCESS This is an Open
Access article under the CC BY-NC
4.0 license.
Peer-Reviewed Article
Citation: Nica I, Stoleriu S, Iovan G, Ghior-
ghe C-A, Pancu G, Munteanu A, Andrian S.
Comparative study regarding the effect of
different finishing and polishing systems on
a bulk-fill composite resin surface. Stoma
Edu J. 2018;5(2):92-97.
Academic Editor: Jean-François Roulet,
DDS, PhD, Prof hc, Professor, University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Received: May 15, 2018
Revised: May 28, 2018
Acccepted: June 08, 2018
Published: June 11, 2018
*Corresponding author: Assoc.
Professor Stoleriu Simona, DDS, PhD
Department of Odontology - Periodontology
and Fixed Prosthodontics Faculty of Dental
Medicine, „Grigore. T. Popa” University of
Medicine and Pharmacy 16, Universității
Street, RO-700115 Jassy, Romania Tel/Fax:
[phone], e-mail: stoleriu_simona@
yahoo.com
Copyright: © 2018 the Editorial Council
for the Stomatology Edu Journal.
of the particles from which it is made and all these in
relation to the structure of the composite material [6-8].
Aim The purpose of the present study was to evaluate
the surface characteristics of a bulk fill composite resin
used for direct restoration when different types of
finishing and polishing systems were used. The surface
microstructure was qualitatively evaluated by scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) and quantitatively assessed
by surface roughness determination using profilometry.
2. Materials and Methods
The material used in the present study was Filtek Bulk
Fill Posterior Restorative (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA).
Lot: N720858, shade A3. It was designed to be easily
and quickly applied in layers of 5 mm thickness, and it
can remain exposed to occlusal forces.
The organic matrix of the Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior
Restorative composite contains two new methacrylic
monomers, which act synergistically to reduce the
polymerization shrinkage. One of the monomers is
a high molecular weight aromatic dimethacrylate
(AUDM), which modulates the volumetric contraction.
The second innovative monomer is actually a class of
Stoma Edu J. 2018;5(2): 92-97
http://www.stomaeduj.com