Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Morais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna de
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti, Nascimento-Júnior, Francisco de Assis do, Mendes, Adrielly Fonseca, Tabosa, Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Research, Society and Development
Texto Completo: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/14194
Resumo: Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the in vitro performance of three different finishing and polishing systems, concerning providing better surface smoothness. Materials and methods: 2x4 mm specimens were made with 6 composites: Filtek Z250, Classic Herculite, Opalis, Filtek Z350, Zirconfilll and Estelite Omega, which were subsequently divided into four groups according to a different finishing system (Sof-Lex, OptiDisc, Praxis and Control). After polishing, twelve specimens were distributed to each of the six resins studied, making a total of 72 samples (n = 3), which had their roughness evaluated by a contact roughnessmeter. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's post-test with Bonferroni adjustment were used to search for significant differences. Values ​​were considered significant when p <0.05. Results: The roughness values ​​for finishing systems showed statistical differences between OpiDisc x Praxis (p = 1,000), OpiDisc and Sof-lex (p = 0.605) and Control and all systems (p <0.0001). There was no statistical difference when analyzing the combination of resin x system. The Mylar strip provided surface quality. Conclusions: The size, composition and shape of the filler influenced the surface. Sof-lex and Praxis showed similar results, thus being a good choice for polishing. Clinical Relevance: This study aimed to help the professional in the choice of a better material in the polishing step.
id UNIFEI_03f31d880dddea7d81aaef394e6ed067
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/14194
network_acronym_str UNIFEI
network_name_str Research, Society and Development
repository_id_str
spelling Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systemsRugosidad superficial en resinas compuestas sometidas a tres diferentes sistemas de acabado y pulidoRugosidade superficial de resinas compostas submetidas à três diferentes sistemas de acabamento e polimentoEstética dentáriaResinas compostasPolimento dentárioDentística operatória.Dental aestheticsComposite resinsDental polishingOperative dentistry.Estética dentalResinas compuestasPulido dentalOperatoria dental.Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the in vitro performance of three different finishing and polishing systems, concerning providing better surface smoothness. Materials and methods: 2x4 mm specimens were made with 6 composites: Filtek Z250, Classic Herculite, Opalis, Filtek Z350, Zirconfilll and Estelite Omega, which were subsequently divided into four groups according to a different finishing system (Sof-Lex, OptiDisc, Praxis and Control). After polishing, twelve specimens were distributed to each of the six resins studied, making a total of 72 samples (n = 3), which had their roughness evaluated by a contact roughnessmeter. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's post-test with Bonferroni adjustment were used to search for significant differences. Values ​​were considered significant when p <0.05. Results: The roughness values ​​for finishing systems showed statistical differences between OpiDisc x Praxis (p = 1,000), OpiDisc and Sof-lex (p = 0.605) and Control and all systems (p <0.0001). There was no statistical difference when analyzing the combination of resin x system. The Mylar strip provided surface quality. Conclusions: The size, composition and shape of the filler influenced the surface. Sof-lex and Praxis showed similar results, thus being a good choice for polishing. Clinical Relevance: This study aimed to help the professional in the choice of a better material in the polishing step.Objetivo: El presente estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar el desempeño in vitro de tres sistemas diferentes de acabado y pulido, considerando su capacidad para proveer una mejor suavidad. Materiales y Métodos: Se realizaron muestras de 2x4 mm con 6 composites: Filtek Z250, Classic Herculite, Opalis, Filtek Z350, Zirconfilll y Estelite Omega, que posteriormente se dividieron en cuatro grupos según un sistema de acabado diferente (Sof-Lex, OptiDisc, Praxis y control). Después del pulido, se distribuyeron doce muestras a cada una de las seis resinas estudiadas, haciendo un total de 72 muestras (n = 3), a las que se les evaluó la rugosidad mediante un rugosímetro de contacto. Se utilizaron la prueba de Kruskal-Wallis y la posprueba de Dunn con ajuste de Bonferroni para buscar diferencias significativas. Los valores se consideraron significativos cuando p <0,05. Resultados: Los valores de rugosidad de los sistemas de acabado mostraron diferencias estadísticas entre OpiDisc x Praxis (p = 1,000), OpiDisc y Sof-lex (p = 0,605) y Control y todos los sistemas (p <0,0001). No hubo diferencia estadística al analizar la combinación resina x sistema. La tira de Mylar proporcionó calidad de superficie. Conclusiones: El tamaño, la composición y la forma del relleno influyeron en la superficie. Sof-lex y Praxis mostraron resultados similares, siendo, por tanto, una buena opción para el pulido. Relevancia clínica: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo ayudar al profesional a elegir el mejor material en el paso de pulido.Objetivo: O presente estudo teve como objetivo avaliar o desempenho in vitro de três diferentes sistemas de acabamento e polimento, considerando sua capacidade de proporcionar melhor lisura. Materiais e Métodos: Espécimes de 2x4 mm foram confeccionados com 6 compósitos: Filtek Z250, Classic Herculite, Opalis, Filtek Z350, Zirconfilll e Estelite Omega, que foram posteriormente divididos em quatro grupos de acordo com um sistema de acabamento diferente (Sof-Lex, OptiDisc, Praxis e controle). Após o polimento, doze corpos de prova foram distribuídos para cada uma das seis resinas estudadas, perfazendo um total de 72 amostras (n = 3), as quais tiveram sua rugosidade avaliada por um rugosímetro de contato. O teste de Kruskal-Wallis e o pós-teste de Dunn com ajuste de Bonferroni foram usados para buscar diferenças significativas. Os valores foram considerados significativos quando p <0,05. Resultados: Os valores de rugosidade dos sistemas de acabamento apresentaram diferenças estatísticas entre OpiDisc x Praxis (p = 1.000), OpiDisc e Sof-lex (p = 0,605) e Controle e todos os sistemas (p <0,0001). Não houve diferença estatística ao analisar a combinação resina x sistema. A tira de Mylar forneceu qualidade de superfície. Conclusões: O tamanho, composição e forma do filler influenciaram a superfície. Sof-lex e Praxis apresentaram resultados semelhantes, sendo, portanto, uma boa escolha para polimento. Relevância Clínica: Este estudo teve como objetivo auxiliar o profissional na escolha do melhor material na etapa de polimento.Research, Society and Development2021-04-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/1419410.33448/rsd-v10i4.14194Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 4; e52510414194Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 4; e52510414194Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 4; e525104141942525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIenghttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/14194/12962Copyright (c) 2021 Lorem Krsna de Morais-Sousa; Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti Lima; Francisco de Assis do Nascimento-Júnior; Adrielly Fonseca Mendes; Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro Tabosahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMorais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna deLima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti Nascimento-Júnior, Francisco de Assis do Mendes, Adrielly Fonseca Tabosa, Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro 2021-04-25T11:21:26Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/14194Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:35:22.445081Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
Rugosidad superficial en resinas compuestas sometidas a tres diferentes sistemas de acabado y pulido
Rugosidade superficial de resinas compostas submetidas à três diferentes sistemas de acabamento e polimento
title Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
spellingShingle Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
Morais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna de
Estética dentária
Resinas compostas
Polimento dentário
Dentística operatória.
Dental aesthetics
Composite resins
Dental polishing
Operative dentistry.
Estética dental
Resinas compuestas
Pulido dental
Operatoria dental.
title_short Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
title_full Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
title_fullStr Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
title_full_unstemmed Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
title_sort Surface roughness of composite resins submitted to three different finish and polish systems
author Morais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna de
author_facet Morais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna de
Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti
Nascimento-Júnior, Francisco de Assis do
Mendes, Adrielly Fonseca
Tabosa, Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro
author_role author
author2 Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti
Nascimento-Júnior, Francisco de Assis do
Mendes, Adrielly Fonseca
Tabosa, Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Morais-Sousa, Lorem Krsna de
Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti
Nascimento-Júnior, Francisco de Assis do
Mendes, Adrielly Fonseca
Tabosa, Taynara de Araújo Ribeiro
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Estética dentária
Resinas compostas
Polimento dentário
Dentística operatória.
Dental aesthetics
Composite resins
Dental polishing
Operative dentistry.
Estética dental
Resinas compuestas
Pulido dental
Operatoria dental.
topic Estética dentária
Resinas compostas
Polimento dentário
Dentística operatória.
Dental aesthetics
Composite resins
Dental polishing
Operative dentistry.
Estética dental
Resinas compuestas
Pulido dental
Operatoria dental.
description Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the in vitro performance of three different finishing and polishing systems, concerning providing better surface smoothness. Materials and methods: 2x4 mm specimens were made with 6 composites: Filtek Z250, Classic Herculite, Opalis, Filtek Z350, Zirconfilll and Estelite Omega, which were subsequently divided into four groups according to a different finishing system (Sof-Lex, OptiDisc, Praxis and Control). After polishing, twelve specimens were distributed to each of the six resins studied, making a total of 72 samples (n = 3), which had their roughness evaluated by a contact roughnessmeter. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's post-test with Bonferroni adjustment were used to search for significant differences. Values ​​were considered significant when p <0.05. Results: The roughness values ​​for finishing systems showed statistical differences between OpiDisc x Praxis (p = 1,000), OpiDisc and Sof-lex (p = 0.605) and Control and all systems (p <0.0001). There was no statistical difference when analyzing the combination of resin x system. The Mylar strip provided surface quality. Conclusions: The size, composition and shape of the filler influenced the surface. Sof-lex and Praxis showed similar results, thus being a good choice for polishing. Clinical Relevance: This study aimed to help the professional in the choice of a better material in the polishing step.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-04-21
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/14194
10.33448/rsd-v10i4.14194
url https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/14194
identifier_str_mv 10.33448/rsd-v10i4.14194
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/14194/12962
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 4; e52510414194
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 4; e52510414194
Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 4; e52510414194
2525-3409
reponame:Research, Society and Development
instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
instacron:UNIFEI
instname_str Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
instacron_str UNIFEI
institution UNIFEI
reponame_str Research, Society and Development
collection Research, Society and Development
repository.name.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv rsd.articles@gmail.com
_version_ 1797052674674262016