{"title":"Effect of magnification and press-on force on resin composite polishing.","authors":"Tuna Unal, Bora Korkut, Dilek Tağtekin","doi":"10.1186/s12903-025-06844-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate surface roughness (Ra) and gloss (GU) of two resin composites after polishing with two systems, using a novel press-on force guided (PFG) polishing simulator.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Eighty specimens were prepared using Essentia Universal (EU) and G-aenial Universal Injectable (GUI) composites. Surface roughness and gloss were assessed by a profilometer (Marsurf Ps10), and a glossmeter (Novo-Curve). They were polished with Sof-Lex and Twist Dia systems with or without magnification and PFG. Each polishing material was used for 30 s. Ra<sub>1</sub> and GU<sub>1</sub> measurements were repeated by the same operator. Data were analyzed using One-way ANOVA, Three-way ANOVA, and Robust ANOVA with Bonferroni Correction for multiple comparisons and Spearman's rho Correlation Coefficient (< 0.050).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Higher Ra values were observed in GUI group for Twist Dia (0.33 ± 0.05<sup>z</sup>) compared to SofLex (0.22 ± 0.08<sup>y</sup>). Roughness was higher when PFG was uncontrolled (0.31 ± 0.07<sup>x</sup>), compared to the controlled (0.25 ± 0.09<sup>w</sup>). No Ra difference was observed in EU group between SofLex (0.33 ± 0.04) and Twist Dia (0.29 ± 0.04)(P = .440). Uncontrolled PFG provided higher gloss for GUI and EU composites (69.7 ± 2.91<sup>x</sup>, 54.63 ± 18.68<sup>x</sup>, respectively). Twist Dia presented higher gloss for GUI and EU composites (72.3 ± 2.57<sup>z</sup>,58.88 ± 13.73<sup>z</sup>, respectively). Magnification did not affect the roughness or gloss for both composites (P ≥ .05). A moderate negative correlation was found between roughness and gloss in GUI (r=-.546)(P < .001), while no correlation was observed in EU (r=-.110)(P = .449).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Higher surface roughness and gloss were observed with uncontrolled (not constant) press-on force. Even though SofLex may provide a lower surface roughness, Twist Dia can generate a greater surface gloss regardless of the composite type. 3.5X loupe magnification was not effective on surface roughness and gloss within a limited polishing time.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Press-on force is an important factor affecting the composite polishing quality. Spiral polishing wheels can be advantageous for composite restoration polishing, as they better preserve the secondary and tertiary anatomies and provide a higher gloss. The effect of magnification on composite polishing can be related to the time spent using it.</p>","PeriodicalId":9072,"journal":{"name":"BMC Oral Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"1600"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12514787/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Oral Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06844-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate surface roughness (Ra) and gloss (GU) of two resin composites after polishing with two systems, using a novel press-on force guided (PFG) polishing simulator.
Materials and methods: Eighty specimens were prepared using Essentia Universal (EU) and G-aenial Universal Injectable (GUI) composites. Surface roughness and gloss were assessed by a profilometer (Marsurf Ps10), and a glossmeter (Novo-Curve). They were polished with Sof-Lex and Twist Dia systems with or without magnification and PFG. Each polishing material was used for 30 s. Ra1 and GU1 measurements were repeated by the same operator. Data were analyzed using One-way ANOVA, Three-way ANOVA, and Robust ANOVA with Bonferroni Correction for multiple comparisons and Spearman's rho Correlation Coefficient (< 0.050).
Results: Higher Ra values were observed in GUI group for Twist Dia (0.33 ± 0.05z) compared to SofLex (0.22 ± 0.08y). Roughness was higher when PFG was uncontrolled (0.31 ± 0.07x), compared to the controlled (0.25 ± 0.09w). No Ra difference was observed in EU group between SofLex (0.33 ± 0.04) and Twist Dia (0.29 ± 0.04)(P = .440). Uncontrolled PFG provided higher gloss for GUI and EU composites (69.7 ± 2.91x, 54.63 ± 18.68x, respectively). Twist Dia presented higher gloss for GUI and EU composites (72.3 ± 2.57z,58.88 ± 13.73z, respectively). Magnification did not affect the roughness or gloss for both composites (P ≥ .05). A moderate negative correlation was found between roughness and gloss in GUI (r=-.546)(P < .001), while no correlation was observed in EU (r=-.110)(P = .449).
Conclusion: Higher surface roughness and gloss were observed with uncontrolled (not constant) press-on force. Even though SofLex may provide a lower surface roughness, Twist Dia can generate a greater surface gloss regardless of the composite type. 3.5X loupe magnification was not effective on surface roughness and gloss within a limited polishing time.
Clinical relevance: Press-on force is an important factor affecting the composite polishing quality. Spiral polishing wheels can be advantageous for composite restoration polishing, as they better preserve the secondary and tertiary anatomies and provide a higher gloss. The effect of magnification on composite polishing can be related to the time spent using it.
期刊介绍：
BMC Oral Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of disorders of the mouth, teeth and gums, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
