IADR Abstract Archives

Effect of Polishing Systems on Gloss of Resin Composites

Objectives: To evaluate gloss of bulk-fill versus universal composites polished with four different polishing systems.
Methods: One hundred and sixty disc-shaped resin composite specimens (10 mm in diameter, 2-mm thick, n=20) were made using of each of eight materials (Table). The specimens in each group were subdivided into four sub-groups (n=5) and polished with one of the following polishing systems: Enhance + PoGo, OneGloss, DiaComp Feather Lite, and Jiffy Points (Table). Gloss was measured using a small area gloss meter (Novo-Curve, Rhopoint Instruments,East Sussex, UK). Means and standard deviations were calculated. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance. Fisher’s PLSD intervals were calculated at the 0.05 level of significance.
Results: Statistically significant differences were recorded among polishing systems and composites (P <0.0001). Fisher’s PLSD interval for comparison among polishing systems and composite types was 3.4 and 2.4, respectively. The highest gloss values were obtained using Enhance+PoGo polishing system, while overall universals exhibited better polishability than bulk-fills (71 vs. 54 GU).
Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that Enhance+PoGo polishing system were the most effective, while higher gloss values were recorded for universal composites as compared to bulk-fills.
Continental European and Scandinavian Divisions Meeting
2017 Continental European and Scandinavian Divisions Meeting (Vienna, Austria)
Vienna, Austria
2017
0100
Dental Materials 7: Color and Appearance (Esthetics)
  • Ceyhan, Yonca  ( The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • Pereira Sanchez, Natalie  ( The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • Mistry, Nikita  ( The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • Powers, John  ( Dental Consultants, Inc. , Ann Arbor , Michigan , United States )
  • Paravina, Rade  ( University of Texas at Houston , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • None
    Poster Session
    Color - Aesthetics - Bleaching
    Thursday, 09/21/2017 , 11:30AM - 12:30PM
    Means and standard deviations (in parentheses) for gloss measurements (gloss units, GU) using four different polishing systems are presented in the Table (Composite types: B=Bulk fill, U=Universal).
    CompositeComposite TypeEnhance+PoGo (Dentsply)OneGloss (Shofu)DiaComp Feather Lite (Brasseler)Jiffy Points (Ultradent)
    Filtek Bulk Fill (3M ESPE)B88(3)35(9)81(9)34(7)
    Filtek Supreme Ultra(3M ESPE)U92(1)19(4)89(5)40(3)
    Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (Ivoclar Vivadent)B90(2)46(14)82(9)52(9)
    Tetric EvoCeram (Ivoclar Vivadent)U90(1)47(10)84(4)64(5)
    x-tra fil (VOCO)B87(3)19(9)56(7)29(4)
    Grandio (VOCO)U82(20)75(9)72(6)45(4)
    Sonicfill (Kerr)B87(3)27(9)69(9)35(11)
    Premise (Kerr)U91(1)49(8)84(5)60(5)