Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study
Introduction: The aim was to assess and compare the surface roughness properties of nanofilled and nanohybrid resin composites using various polishing systems. Methods: A metallic mold was used to create 100 composite discs in total. Two main groups of resin composites were used (each N = 50): group...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Dental Hypotheses |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_69_24 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849427528581644288 |
|---|---|
| author | Tay Hatem Kadhom |
| author_facet | Tay Hatem Kadhom |
| author_sort | Tay Hatem Kadhom |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: The aim was to assess and compare the surface roughness properties of nanofilled and nanohybrid resin composites using various polishing systems. Methods: A metallic mold was used to create 100 composite discs in total. Two main groups of resin composites were used (each N = 50): group I, Filtek Z350 XT (nanofilled composite) and group II, IPS Empress Direct (Nanohybrid composite). Each main group was further divided into five subgroups (each N = 10) as follows: subgroup 1 (Mylar strip), subgroup 2 (Sof-Lex discs), subgroup 3 (SuperSnap discs), subgroup 4 (Opti1Step polisher), and subgroup 5 (OneGloss polisher). The specimens were polished in accordance with the manufacturers’ guidelines. The tested resin composite materials were subjected to measurements of surface roughness utilizing a profilometer device. Results: We found statistically significant differences regarding the type of finishing and polishing systems and the type of composite (P < 0.001). All pairwise post hoc analyses showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The type of finishing and polishing systems and the type of composite significantly affect surface roughness. The Mylar strip system showed the lowest surface roughness. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-e0b38ee957d84e2680823ae5314137b7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2155-8213 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-04-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Dental Hypotheses |
| spelling | doaj-art-e0b38ee957d84e2680823ae5314137b72025-08-20T03:28:59ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsDental Hypotheses2155-82132025-04-01162495210.4103/denthyp.denthyp_69_24Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro StudyTay Hatem KadhomIntroduction: The aim was to assess and compare the surface roughness properties of nanofilled and nanohybrid resin composites using various polishing systems. Methods: A metallic mold was used to create 100 composite discs in total. Two main groups of resin composites were used (each N = 50): group I, Filtek Z350 XT (nanofilled composite) and group II, IPS Empress Direct (Nanohybrid composite). Each main group was further divided into five subgroups (each N = 10) as follows: subgroup 1 (Mylar strip), subgroup 2 (Sof-Lex discs), subgroup 3 (SuperSnap discs), subgroup 4 (Opti1Step polisher), and subgroup 5 (OneGloss polisher). The specimens were polished in accordance with the manufacturers’ guidelines. The tested resin composite materials were subjected to measurements of surface roughness utilizing a profilometer device. Results: We found statistically significant differences regarding the type of finishing and polishing systems and the type of composite (P < 0.001). All pairwise post hoc analyses showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The type of finishing and polishing systems and the type of composite significantly affect surface roughness. The Mylar strip system showed the lowest surface roughness.https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_69_24nanofilled compositenanohybrid compositepolishing systemssurface roughness |
| spellingShingle | Tay Hatem Kadhom Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study Dental Hypotheses nanofilled composite nanohybrid composite polishing systems surface roughness |
| title | Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study |
| title_full | Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study |
| title_short | Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Nanofilled and Nanohybrid Composite Restorative Materials Utilizing Various Finishing and Polishing Systems: A Comparative In Vitro Study |
| title_sort | evaluation of surface roughness of nanofilled and nanohybrid composite restorative materials utilizing various finishing and polishing systems a comparative in vitro study |
| topic | nanofilled composite nanohybrid composite polishing systems surface roughness |
| url | https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_69_24 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tayhatemkadhom evaluationofsurfaceroughnessofnanofilledandnanohybridcompositerestorativematerialsutilizingvariousfinishingandpolishingsystemsacomparativeinvitrostudy |