EFFECT OF THREE POLISHING SYSTEMS ON THE ROUGHNESS AND GLOSSINESS OF NANOCERAMIC COMPOSITE RESIN
Objective: The purpose of resin polish is to produce a restored surface that is similar to that of enamel. The objective of this study was to analyze the
polishing effect of three systems in terms of the comparative roughness or glossiness achieved with nanoceramic composite resin.
Methods: Forty samples of nanoceramic composite resin were divided into four groups as follows: Group 1 was the control group, which
involved polymerization using Mylar strips; Group 2 involved a one-step polishing method; Group 3 involved a two-step method; and Group
4 involved a four-step method. After performing these methods, the comparative roughness and glossiness of the resulting surfaces were
Results: Group 4 generated the lowest roughness value, with an almost equal value to that of the control group, which was followed by Group 3 and
Group 2. The best surface in terms of glossiness was achieved in Group 4.
Conclusion: The polishing system involving the four-step method generated the lowest roughness value and the highest surface glossiness value.
2. Kritzinger D. The effect of different polishing systems on the surface
roughness of a nanocomposite and a microhybrid composite. SADJ
3. Mopper BK. Contouring, finishing, and polishing anterior composites.
Insid Dent 2011;7:62-70.
4. Balan A, Sandu A, Stoleriu S, Pintiliciuc VS, Toma V. Effect of different
finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness of composite
resins. Mater Plast 2015;52:55-7.
5. Van Der Vyver P. Predictable restorations using a new nano-ceramic
composite-two case studies. Int Dent 2002;6:36-46.
6. Gladwin MB. Clinical Aspects of Dental Materials. 4th ed.
Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2013.
7. Kenneth JA, Ralph WP, Chiayi S, Ralph R. Phillips’ Science of Dental
Materials. 12th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier/Saunders; 2013.
8. Watanabe T, Miyazaki M, Takamizawa T. Influence of polishing
duration on surface roughness. J Oral Sci 2005;47:21-5.
9. Atabek D, Ekçi ES. The effect of various polishing systems on the surface
roughness of composite resins. Acta Odontol Turc 2016;33:69-74.
10. Baltac?o?lu IH, Irmak O, Ulusoy N, Cengiz E. Comparison of onestep
and multistep polishing systems for the surface roughness of resin
composites. Open J Stomatol 2016;6:73-80.
11. Ferracane J, Paravina RD, Mazur RU. Roughness and gloss of various
resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19:214-24.
12. Samuelson BA. Materials after finishing and polishing. Gen Dent
13. Carvalho F, Lins R, Ferreira RC, Pereira CN, Moreira AN,
Magalhães CS. Surface roughness, microhardness, and microleakage of
a silorane-based composite resin after immediate or delayed finishing/
polishing. Int J Dent 2016;2016:1-8.
14. Goncalves CF, Ferracane JL. Comparison of two-step versus four-step
composite finishing/polishing disc systems: Evaluation of a new twostep
composite polishing disc system. Oper Dent 2011;36:205-12.
15. Guará K, Almeida B, Guará K, Costa JF, Alves CM. Effect of different
polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites.
J Appl Oral Sci 2009;17:21-6.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.