Next Article in Journal
Studies on the Exposure of Gadolinium Containing Nanoparticles with Monochromatic X-rays Drive Advances in Radiation Therapy
Next Article in Special Issue
Styrene-Based Elastomer Composites with Functionalized Graphene Oxide and Silica Nanofiber Fillers: Mechanical and Thermal Conductivity Properties
Previous Article in Journal
Two-Dimensional Tungsten Disulfide-Based Ethylene Glycol Nanofluids: Stability, Thermal Conductivity, and Rheological Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
Flux-Free Diffusion Joining of SiCp/6063 Al Matrix Composites Using Liquid Gallium with Nano-Copper Particles in Atmosphere Environment
Open AccessArticle

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

Department of Therapeutic Dentistry, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119991 Moscow, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nanomaterials 2020, 10(7), 1339; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10071339
Received: 16 June 2020 / Revised: 1 July 2020 / Accepted: 6 July 2020 / Published: 9 July 2020
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. View Full-Text
Keywords: surface roughness; nanocomposite resins; dental finishing and polishing; composite/enamel interface; composite/cementum interface; contact stylus profilometry surface roughness; nanocomposite resins; dental finishing and polishing; composite/enamel interface; composite/cementum interface; contact stylus profilometry
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Babina, K.; Polyakova, M.; Sokhova, I.; Doroshina, V.; Arakelyan, M.; Novozhilova, N. The Effect of Finishing and Polishing Sequences on The Surface Roughness of Three Different Nanocomposites and Composite/Enamel and Composite/Cementum Interfaces. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1339.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop