Literature DB >> 35701137

[Surface roughness, gloss and sequential polishing times of various chairside computer aided design/manufacturing restorative materials].

H Luo1, F C Tian2, X Y Wang1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of polishing on surface roughness, gloss and optimum polishing time of various computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) restorative materials and to provide a proper polishing procedure for dental clinicians.
METHODS: Five CAD/CAM restorative materials including vita mark Ⅱ (VM), vita enamic (VE), lava ultimate (LU), shofu block HC (SB) and brilliant crios (BC) were selected. Six specimens were prepared for each material. The specimen was fixed on a custom-made polishing apparatus and sequentially polished with Sof-Lex poli-shing disk system including medium disk (with abrasive particle sizes of 10-40 μm), fine disk (with abrasive particle sizes of 3-9 μm) and superfine disk (with abrasive particle sizes of 1-7 μm). Surface roughness (Ra value) and gloss value were measured every 10 seconds until the numerical values were no longer changed. Then the surface roughness, gloss value and polishing time were recorded and the specimen was moved to the next sequence of polishing. Finally, statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 24.0.
RESULTS: For all the restorative materials, the Ra values were significantly reduced (P < 0.05) and the gloss values were significantly increased (P < 0.05) after sequentially polishing with Sof-Lex disks. No significant difference was detected among Ra values of all the tested materials (P>0.05) after sequential polishing. The gloss values of LU [(68.1±4.5) GU] and BC [(68.2±5.8) GU] were significantly higher than those of VE [(48.1±8.1) GU] and BC [(53.2±5.8) GU], P < 0.05. To obtain optimal surface smoothness, VM cost the shortest polishing time [40 (30, 55) s] among all the restorative materials (P < 0.05). No significant differences in the total polishing time were observed among VE [140 (135, 145) s], LU [130 (120, 140) s], SB [140 (130, 150) s] and BC [130 (120, 140) s], P>0.05.
CONCLUSION: The surface roughness of all CAD/CAM restorative materials were decreased after sequentially polishing with Sof-Lex disk system. To obtain the smoothest surface, different types of restorative materials might need different polishing times using Sof-Lex polishing disk system. For ceramic restorative material VM, we recommend polishing only with medium disk for 40 s. For hybrid restorative material VE and composite restorative material LU, SB and BC, we recommend polishing with medium disk, fine disk and superfine disk in sequence for 130-140 s in total.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing; Gloss; Restorative materials; Surface roughness

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35701137      PMCID: PMC9197698     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban        ISSN: 1671-167X


  23 in total

1.  Effect of finishing technique on the microleakage and surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials.

Authors:  A D Wilder; E J Swift; K N May; J Y Thompson; R A McDougal
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 2.  Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature.

Authors:  C M Bollen; P Lambrechts; M Quirynen
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 5.304

3.  Induced damage zone in micro-fine dental finishing of a feldspathic porcelain.

Authors:  Xiao-Fei Song; Ling Yin
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.242

4.  Interoperator variability during polishing.

Authors:  Colin S Jones; Richard W Billington; Gavin J Pearson
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.677

5.  The effect of different polishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of various resin composites.

Authors:  Juliana Da Costa; Jack Ferracane; Rade D Paravina; Rui Fernando Mazur; Leslie Roeder
Journal:  J Esthet Restor Dent       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.843

6.  [Polishing performance of different polishing tools for CEREC Blocs ceramic].

Authors:  Wang Tao; Guo Zhenwei; Guo Huijing; Qiao Xianghe
Journal:  Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2017-04-01

Review 7.  Do nanofill or submicron composites show improved smoothness and gloss? A systematic review of in vitro studies.

Authors:  Marina R Kaizer; Aline de Oliveira-Ogliari; Maximiliano S Cenci; Niek J M Opdam; Rafael R Moraes
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 5.304

8.  Degradation of optical and surface properties of resin-based composites with distinct nanoparticle sizes but equivalent surface area.

Authors:  Vinícius Esteves Salgado; Larissa Maria Cavalcante; Rafael R Moraes; Harry B Davis; Jack L Ferracane; Luis Felipe Schneider
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Effect of Finishing and Polishing on Roughness and Gloss of Lithium Disilicate and Lithium Silicate Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ceramic for CAD/CAM Systems.

Authors:  A Vichi; R Fabian Fonzar; C Goracci; M Carrabba; M Ferrari
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2018 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 2.440

10.  Isolation of the antibiotic methyl (R,E)-3-(1-hydroxy-4-oxocyclopent-2-en-1-yl)-acrylate EA-2801 from Trichoderma atroviridae.

Authors:  Emilie Adelin; Géraldine Le Goff; Pascal Retailleau; Mercedes Bonfill; Jamal Ouazzani
Journal:  J Antibiot (Tokyo)       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 2.649

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.