Efficacy of one-step and multi-step polishing systems in finishing direct composite restoration: a non-randomised controlled experimental trial

Background. The variety of polishing systems and tools available for finishing direct composite restorations may perplex the dentist.

Objectives. An effect evaluation in one- and multi-step composite polishing tools using model specimens of GC Gradia Direct and 3M ESPE Filtek Ultimate restoratives.

Methods. The prepared specimens of GC Gradia Direct and 3M ESPE Filtek Ultimate restorative composites were exposed in laboratory to the Kenda Maximus, Dentsply PoGo, Kagayaki RoundFlex, Shofu Super-Snap, Kagayaki Ensmart Pin, EVE Composoft polishing systems and Daiyamondo Kagayaki paste. The polishing systems distinguished by brand, technical and performance characters.

Surface microgeometry in all 16 samples was estimated in the Laboratory of Optical Metrology, Institute of Design and Technology for Scientific Instrument Engineering, Novosibirsk, using a MNP-1 light interferometric nanoprofile microscope and at the shared core facilities of the Research and Education Centre “Nanomaterial Diagnostics and Properties” of Kuban State University, Krasnodar, using a JEOL JSM-7500F scanning electron microscope.

Results. Optical profilometry and scanning electron microscopy were used to estimate surface roughness in 16 specimens exposed to polishing for one minute. The polishing tools Kenda Maximus, Dentsply PoGo, Kagayaki RoundFlex, Shofu Super-Snap, Kagayaki Ensmart Pin, EVE Composoft, as well as Daiyamondo Kagayaki paste used in instrumental polishing, revealed a varied performance. Optical profilometry exhibited the GC Gradia Direct and Filtek Ultimate specimens to possess the lowest average roughness in two cases: 1) after multi-step polishing with Kagayaki Ensmart Pin tools with Daiyamondo Kagayaki paste (average roughness corresponded to Sa — 0.214 pm in GC Gradia Direct and Sa — 0.248 pm — in Filtek Ultimate), 2) in application of the Kenda Maximus monopolishing tool (roughness values of Sa — 0.211 and Sa — 0.242 pm, respectively). Surface roughness after multi-step machining with EVE Composoft silicone polishers was average Sa — 0.579 and Sa — 0.549 pm in both samples and was reported the highest. Scanning electron microscopy confirmed the optical profilometry estimates.

Conclusion. The assay showed that the specimen machining with a sole Kenda Maximus diamond abrasive tool and several Kagayaki Ensmart Pin silicone polishing heads followed by a Daiyamondo Kagayaki diamond abrasive paste application produced very similar surface roughness values, which were graded the lowest with GC Gradia Direct and 3M ESPE Filtek Ultimate composite samples using scanning electron microscopy and optical profilometry.

1. Can Say E., Yurdagiiven H., Yaman B.C., Ozer F. Surface roughness and morphology of resin composites polished with two-step polishing systems. Dent. Mater. J. 2014; 33(3): 332-342. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2013-287

2. Liebermann A., Spintzyk S., Reymus M., Schweizer E., Stawarczyk B. Nine prophylactic polishing pastes: impact on discoloration, gloss, and surface properties of a CAD/CAM resin composite. Clin. Oral. Investig. 2019; 23(1): 327-335. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2440-z

3. Sakoda S., Nakao N., Watanabe I. The effect of abrading and cutting instruments on machinability of dental ceramics. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2018; 29(3): 34. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-018-6031-y

4. Paolone G., Moratti E., Goracci C., Gherlone E., Vi-chi A. Effect of finishing systems on surface roughness and gloss of full-body bulk-fill resin composites. Materials (Basel). 2020; 13(24): 5657. DOI: 10.3390/ma13245657

5. Ishii R., Takamizawa T, Tsujimoto A., Suzuki S., Imai A., Barkmeier W.W., Latta M.A., Miyazaki M. Effects of Finishing and Polishing Methods on the Surface Roughness and Surface Free Energy of Bulk-fill Resin Composites. Oper. Dent. 2020; 45(2): E91-E104. DOI: 10.2341/18-246-L

6. Yamanel K. Effect of Different Prophylactic Polishing Procedures on the Surface Roughness of Microhybrid and Nanohybrid Resin Composites. Cumhuriyet Dent. J. 2018; 21(2): 85-92. DOI: 10.7126/cumudj.410459

7. Gill Aydin E., Ozalp N. Which Finishing and Polishing Technique is More Effective for Surface Roughness and Microhardness? Cumhuriyet Dent. J. 2021; 24(1): 21-29. DOI: 10.7126/cumudj.796652

8. Nair V.S., Sainudeen S., Padmanabhan P, Vi-jayashankar L.V., Sujathan U., Pillai R. Three-dimensional evaluation of surface roughness of resin composites after finishing and polishing. J. Conserv. Dent. 2016; 19(1): 91-95. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.173208

9. Ashour M., Anwar M., Nour K. Effect of multiple use and sterilization of single-step polishing systems on the surface roughness of resin composite. Egyptian Dental Journal. 2020; 66(4): 2785-2895. DOI: 10.21608/edj.2020.39629.1215

10. 10.Sysoev E., Kosolobov S., Kulikov R., Latyshev A., Sitnikov S., Vykhristyuk I. Interferometric Surface Relief Measurements with Subnano/Picometer Height Resolution. Measurement Science Review. 2017; 17(5): 213-218. DOI: 10.1515/msr-2017-0025

11. Basavarajappa S. Comparison of two finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness of resin composites using a non-contact profilometer. Chemical Sciences Journal. 2018; 09. DOI: 10.4172/2150-3494-c3-023

12. Chugui Y, Verkhoglyad A., Zavyalov P, Sysoev E., Kulikov R., Vykhristyuk I., Zavyalova M., Poleshchuk A., Korolkov V. Optical Measuring and Laser Technologies for Scientific and Industrial Applications. International Journal of Automation Technology. 2015; 9(5): 515-524. DOI: 10.20965/ijat.2015.p0515

13. Nica I., Iovan G., Pancu G., Stoleriu S., Andrian S. Evaluation of surface characteristics of direct composite resins after finishing and polishing using fractal analysis. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2019; 572: 012118. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899x/572/1/012118

14. Chen Y, Chen J. Optical Inspection System for Gear Tooth Surfaces Using a Projection Moire Method. Sensors (Basel). 2019; 19(6): 1450. DOI: 10.3390/s19061450

15. Gaussian Regression Filters. In: Muralikrishnan B., Raja J., editors. Computational Surface and Roundness Metrology. London: Springer; 2009. 67-76. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-84800-297-5_9

16. Gaonkar S.H., Aras M.A., Chitre V. An in vitro study to compare the surface roughness of glazed and chair-side polished dental monolithic zirconia using two polishing systems. J. Indian Prosthodont. Soc. 2020; 20(2): 186-192. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_339_19

17. Uppal M., Ganesh A., Balagopal S., Kaur G. Profilo-metric analysis of two composite resins' surface repolished after tooth brush abrasion with three polishing systems. Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2013; 16(4): 309. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.114356

18. Effect of different finishing systems and time of finishing on surface roughness of bulk-fill resin composite versus nano resin composite? Ain Shams Dental Journal. 2020; 17(1): 21-28. DOI: 10.21608/asdj.2020.164413

19. Soares L., Razaghy M., Magne P Optimization of large MOD restorations: Composite resin inlays vs. short fiber-reinforced direct restorations. Dent. Mater. 2018; 34(4): 587-587. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2018.01.004

20. Chiang Y, Eddie-Hsiang-Hua Lai E., Kunzelmann K. Polishing mechanism of light-initiated dental composite: Geometric optics approach. J. Formos. Med. Assoc. 2016; 115(12): 1053-1060. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2015.10.010

21. Nezafat N.B., Ghoranneviss M., Elahi S.M., Sha-fiekhani A., Ghorannevis Z., Solaymani S. Microstructure, micromorphology, and fractal geometry of hard dental tissues: Evaluation of atomic force microscopy images. Microsc. Res. Tech. 2019; 82(11): 18841890. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23356

22. Solaymani S., Ghoranneviss M., Elahi S.M., Sha-fiekhani A., Kulesza S., Jalu §., Bramowicz M., Hante-hzadeh M., Nezafat N.B. The relation between structural, rugometric and fractal characteristics of hard dental tissues at micro and nano levels. Microsc. Res. Tech. 2019; 82(4): 421-428. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23183

23. Solaymani S., Jalu §., Ghoranneviss M., Elahi S.M., Shafiekhani A., Hantehzadeh M., Nezafat N.B. Multifractal analysis of human canine teeth at nano scale: atomic force microscopy studies. International Nano Letters. 2019; 10(1): 15-22. DOI: 10.1007/s40089-019-00293-7

24. Glauser S., Astasov-Frauenhoffer M., MQller J.A., Fischer J., Waltimo T., Rohr N. Bacterial colonization of resin composite cements: influence of material composition and surface roughness. Eur. J. Oral. Sci. 2017; 125(4): 294-302. DOI: 10.1111/eos.12355

25. Severina T.V., Ovcharenko E.S. Features of growth of tooth biophenics depending on the quality of final treatment of composite restoration surface. Parodon-tologiya. 2018; 24(4): 48-54 (In Russ., English abstract). DOI: 10.25636/PMP1.2018.4.9