People | Locations | Statistics |
---|---|---|
Naji, M. |
| |
Motta, Antonella |
| |
Aletan, Dirar |
| |
Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
Ertürk, Emre |
| |
Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
Kononenko, Denys |
| |
Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
Bih, L. |
| |
Casati, R. |
| |
Muller, Hermance |
| |
Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
Azam, Siraj |
| |
Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
Blanpain, Bart |
| |
Ali, M. A. |
| |
Popa, V. |
| |
Rančić, M. |
| |
Ollier, Nadège |
| |
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
Landes, Michael |
| |
Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Andrade, Guilherme Schmitt De
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (6/6 displayed)
- 2022Comparison of Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Resin Based Composites Containing Different Monomerscitations
- 2022Fracture resistance and biomechanical behavior of different access cavities of maxillary central incisors restored with different composite resinscitations
- 2022Fracture resistance and stress distribution of weakened teeth reinforced with a bundled glass fiber–reinforced resin postcitations
- 2021One-piece, CAD/CAM, fiber-reinforced composite post and core
- 2021Functional or nonfunctional cusps preservation for molars restored with indirect composite or Glass-ceramic Onlayscitations
- 2020Influence of different post-endodontic restorations on the fatigue survival and biomechanical behavior of central incisors
Places of action
Organizations | Location | People |
---|
article
Comparison of Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Resin Based Composites Containing Different Monomers
Abstract
<p>Changes in the organic matrix of composite resins have been proposed to improve their surface properties. However, polishing systems may perform differently in different materials. This study compared the effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of four composite resins containing different resin monomers: Admira Fusion (nanohybrid containing pure ormocer), Aura Bulkfill (nanohybrid containing Bis-GMA, UDMA), Charisma Diamond (nanohybrid containing TCD-DI-HEA) and Vittra APS (nanofilled containing UDMA). Cylinders (N = 120, n = 10) were prepared from each material and the top surface of each specimen was grounded using a diamond finishing bur. Baseline measurements of surface roughness (Ra) were recorded using a contact profilometer and the specimens of each composite were divided into three subgroups according to the polishing system: one-step, two-step, three-step. Ra measurements were recorded also after polishing. Data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). The baseline roughness of all composites was significantly reduced after polishing (p < 0.001). The two-step polishing system provided the smoothest surface for Admira Fusion (0.0770 ± 0.0171) and Charisma (0.1091 ± 0.0090), whereas for Aura and Vittra no significantly differences were found for the three polishing systems tested. The surface smoothness seems to be more material dependent than step dependent, but all tested systems provided clinically acceptable results.</p>