Oper Dent. 2020 Mar/Apr;45(2):E91-E104. doi: 10.2341/18-246-L. Epub 2019 Nov 18.
The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of finishing and polishing methods on surface properties of bulk-fill resin composites through surface roughness () and surface free energy (SFE) measurements, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observations. Three bulk-fill resin composites, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TB), Filtek Bulk Fill (FB), and Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative (FF), and two conventional resin composites, Clearfil AP-X (AP) and Estelite ∑ Quick (EQ) were used. Seventy cured specimens of each resin composite were prepared and divided into seven groups of 10 specimens. , SFE measurements, and SEM observations were conducted after finishing and polishing procedures. Three groups of specimens were finished with a fine grit diamond bur (FDB), and three with a tungsten carbide bur (CBB). After finishing, one group from each type of finishing was polished with aluminum oxide flexible disks (SSD) and one group from each type of finishing was polished with diamond particles embedded in a silicone point (CMP). A baseline group of samples that were neither finished nor polished after removing the translucent strips from the surface was examined. Although the baseline group showed significantly lower values than the other groups, most resin composites showed lower values with CBB+SSD than with the other finishing and polishing groups. Among the tested resin composites, EQ showed significantly lower values than the other resin composites, regardless of the finishing and polishing methods. On the other hand, AP showed significantly higher values than the other resin composites in all finishing and polishing groups, apart from FB with FDB. For the finished specimens, most resin composites showed higher SFE values with CBB than with FDB. For the polished specimens, all the tested resin composites with CMP showed lower γ values than those with SSD, regardless of the finishing method. The baseline groups of TB and FB showed significantly lower SFE values than the other finished and polished groups. In the SEM observations, all the examined resin composites showed rougher surfaces after finishing with FDB than with CBB. However, when comparing the different polishing methods (CMP and SSD), surface smoothness appeared to be material dependent.
本研究旨在通过表面粗糙度(Ra)和表面自由能(SFE)测量以及扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察,确定不同的修整和抛光方法对块状充填树脂复合材料表面性能的影响。使用三种块状充填树脂复合材料(Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill [TB]、Filtek Bulk Fill [FB]和 Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative [FF])和两种传统树脂复合材料(Clearfil AP-X [AP]和 Estelite ∑ Quick [EQ])。每组各制备 70 个固化样本,共 70 个样本,每个树脂复合材料分为 10 个样本,共 210 个样本。在修整和抛光后,进行 Ra、SFE 测量和 SEM 观察。三组样本用细粒度金刚石车针(FDB)修整,三组用碳化钨车针(CBB)修整。修整后,每组各有一个用氧化铝弹性盘(SSD)抛光,另一个用硅树脂点嵌入的金刚石颗粒(CMP)抛光。有一组未修整和抛光的样本作为基线,在从表面去除半透明条后不进行任何处理。尽管基线组的 Ra 值明显低于其他组,但与其他修整和抛光组相比,大多数树脂复合材料用 CBB+SSD 时的 Ra 值较低。在所测试的树脂复合材料中,EQ 无论采用何种修整和抛光方法,其 Ra 值均明显低于其他树脂复合材料。另一方面,在所有修整和抛光组中,AP 的 Ra 值均明显高于其他树脂复合材料,除了 FB 用 FDB 外。对于已完成的样本,与 FDB 相比,大多数树脂复合材料用 CBB 时 SFE 值较高。对于已抛光的样本,所有用 CMP 测试的树脂复合材料的γ值均低于用 SSD 的,无论采用何种修整方法。TB 和 FB 的基线组的 SFE 值明显低于其他完成和抛光组。在 SEM 观察中,与 CBB 相比,所有经 FDB 修整的树脂复合材料的表面均更粗糙。然而,在比较不同的抛光方法(CMP 和 SSD)时,表面光滑度似乎取决于材料。