Lassila Lippo, Säilynoja Eija, Prinssi Roosa, Vallittu Pekka K, Garoushi Sufyan
Department of Biomaterials Science and Turku Clinical Biomaterials Center - TCBC, Institute of Dentistry, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Research Development and Production Department, Stick Tech Ltd - Member of GC Group, Turku, Finland.
Biomater Investig Dent. 2020 Jan 3;7(1):1-8. doi: 10.1080/26415275.2019.1708201. eCollection 2020.
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different polishing protocols on the surface gloss (SG) of different commercial dental resin composites (RCs). A total of 147 block-shaped specimens (40 mm length × 10 mm width × 2 mm thick) were made from conventional RCs (G-aenial Ant. and Flo X), bulk-fill RC (Filtek Bulk Fill), fluoride-releasing RCs (BEAUTIFIL II, ACTIVA-Restorative) and discontinuous microfiber-reinforced RCs (Alert and everX Flow). Each group was subdivided into seven subgroups ( = 3), according to polishing protocol: Laboratory-machine polishing with different siliconcarbide paper grits (G1: 320) → (G2: 800) → (G3: 1200) → (G4: 2000) → (G5: 4000). Chairside-hand polishing using a series of Sof-Lex spiral (G6) and abrasive polishing points (G7). Glossmeter was used to determine the SG at 60° incidence angle. SG was measured before and after polishing. Three-dimensional (3 D) noncontact optical profilometer and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis were performed. Data were analyzed using ANOVA ( = .05). Significant differences in SG (ranged 3-93 GU) were found according to the type of polishing protocol and RC ( < .05). Specimens polished with 4000 grit paper showed the highest SG (93 GU) values among all the groups tested. The tested chairside-hand polishing protocols presented lower SG values than laboratory-machine polishing (4000 silicon paper grit) and unpolished surfaces.
本研究的目的是确定不同抛光方案对不同商用牙科树脂复合材料(RCs)表面光泽度(SG)的影响。总共从传统RCs(G-aenial Ant.和Flo X)、大块充填RC(Filtek Bulk Fill)、含氟RCs(BEAUTIFIL II、ACTIVA-Restorative)和间断微纤维增强RCs(Alert和everX Flow)制作了147个块状标本(长40毫米×宽10毫米×厚2毫米)。根据抛光方案,每组再细分为七个亚组(每组n = 3):使用不同粒度的碳化硅纸进行实验室机器抛光(G1:320)→(G2:800)→(G3:1200)→(G4:2000)→(G5:4000)。使用一系列Sof-Lex螺旋抛光轮(G6)和磨料抛光尖进行椅旁手工抛光(G7)。使用光泽度仪在60°入射角下测定SG。在抛光前后测量SG。进行三维(3D)非接触光学轮廓仪和扫描电子显微镜(SEM)分析。使用方差分析(α = 0.05)分析数据。根据抛光方案类型和RCs发现SG存在显著差异(范围为3 - 93 GU)(P < 0.05)。在所有测试组中,用4000粒度砂纸抛光的标本显示出最高的SG值(93 GU)。测试的椅旁手工抛光方案的SG值低于实验室机器抛光(4000粒度砂纸)和未抛光表面。