Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul-Aug;25(4):448-451.
doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_225_22. Epub 2022 Aug 2.

Quantitative and qualitative surface analysis of three resin composites after polishing - An in vitro study

Affiliations

Quantitative and qualitative surface analysis of three resin composites after polishing - An in vitro study

Panna Mangat et al. J Conserv Dent. 2022 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Aim: The study aims to measure the surface roughness (Ra) of three resin composites subsequent to polishing with diamond-impregnated polishing paste.

Materials and methods: Sixty specimens (10 mm × 2 mm) were prepared in metal molds using three nanocomposites: GC Sculpt, Filtek Z350 XT, and Tetric N Ceram. Specimens were then subjected to baseline roughening with #600 grit sandpaper and were polished with DirectDia paste according to the manufacturer's instructions. After polishing, the Ra of resin composites of all the specimens was measured using profilometer and the surfaces were seen under scanning electron microscope.

Results: Tetric N Ceram specimens were significantly smoother and had the least Ra value compared to other groups.

Conclusion: Among the three resin composites tested, Tetric N Ceram exhibited the least Ra value owing to the small size of inorganic filler particles.

Keywords: Composite resin; profilometer; surface roughness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Graph 1
Graph 1
Ra: The mean ± SD is 0.1605 ± 0.017, 0.1126 ± 0.018, and 0.1329 ± 0.021 for GC Sculpt, Tetric N Ceram, and Filtek Z350, respectively. SD: Standard deviation, Ra: Roughness
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scanning electron microscopy. (a and b) GC Sculpt revealed heterogeneous surface with some matrix imperfections. (c and d) Filtek Z350 showed small heterogeneous surface texture with some voids and dislodgment. (e and f) Tetric N Ceram Reveled smooth surface and no particle dislodging was observed

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Schmitt VL, Puppin-Rontani RM, Naufel FS, Nahsan FP, Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti M, Baseggio W. Effect of the polishing procedures on colour stability and surface roughness of composite resins. ISRN Dent. 2011;2011:617–72. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mopper KW. Contouring, Finishing, and polishing posterior composites. Inside Dent. 2011;7:62–70.
    1. Antonson, Yazici AR, Kilinc E, Antonson DE, Hardigan PC. Comparison of different finishing/polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of resin composites. J Dent. 2011;39(Suppl 1):e 9–17. - PubMed
    1. Jung M, Eichelberger K, Klimek J. Surface geometry of four nanofiller and one hybrid composite after one-step and multiple step polishing. Oper Dent. 2007;32:347–55. - PubMed
    1. Gedik R, Hurmuzulun F, Coskun A, Bektas O. Surface roughness of new Microhybrid resin based composite resin. Oper Dent. 2000;25:311–5. - PubMed