There is no in vitro evidence to support the choice for nanofill or su bmi cron composites over traditional microhybrids based on better surface smoothness and /or gloss , or based upon maintenance of those superficial characteristics after surface challenges
OBJECTIVES Despite nanofill and su bmi cron composites ' aim to provide high initial polishing combined with superior smoothness and gloss retention , the question still remains whether clinicians should consider using these new material s over traditional microhybrids .
The aim of this paper was to systematic ally review the literature on how nanofills and su bmi crons react to polishing procedures and surface challenges in vitro compared with microhybrids .
The paper has also given an overview of the compositional characteristics of all resin composites and polishing systems whose performance was presented herein .
The roughness, microhardness, and surface analysis of nanocomposites after application of topical fluoride gels.
OBJECTIVES Application of acidulated phosphate fluoride ( APF ) gels has long been considered to cause deterioration of composite surfaces . The aims of this study were to demonstrate that nanocomposite surfaces were not affected by some APF gels and to investigate the possible underlying mechanisms . METHODS The elemental composition and viscosity of 3 acidulated phosphate fluoride ( APF ) agents ( 60 Second Taste Gel , Topex , and Zap ) and 1 neutral fluoride agent ( pH7 Gel ) were analyzed . Subsequently , 320 specimens of 3 nanocomposites ( Premisa , Filtek Z350 , and Gr and io ) and a microhybrid composite ( Estelite Sigma ) with 80 specimens for each composite were r and omly divided into 5 groups ( n=16 ) and treated with 4 fluoride gels as well as distilled water which served as the control . Fluoride gels were applied on composite resin surfaces 4 times , 30 min each time . The roughness and microhardness were measured after treatments . Qualitative examination of the surface degradation of the composites was carried out with Fourier transforming infrared spectroscopy ( FTIR ) and scanning electron microscopy ( SEM ) . RESULTS Topex and Zap did not cause surface changes of composite resins , the possible reason being ascribed to the presence of magnesium aluminum silicate ( MAS ) clays . In contrast , 60 Second Taste Gel treatments caused significant roughness increase , microhardness decrease , more prominent filler dissolution , and IR spectral changes of Premisa , Filtek Z350 , and Gr and io . Estelite Sigma was less affected by the 4 fluoride gels . SIGNIFICANCE The composite surfaces were not affected by Topex or Zap even after extended treatments . These two APF gels may be more suitable for clinical applications
There is no in vitro evidence to support the choice for nanofill or su bmi cron composites over traditional microhybrids based on better surface smoothness and /or gloss , or based upon maintenance of those superficial characteristics after surface challenges
OBJECTIVES Despite nanofill and su bmi cron composites ' aim to provide high initial polishing combined with superior smoothness and gloss retention , the question still remains whether clinicians should consider using these new material s over traditional microhybrids .
The aim of this paper was to systematic ally review the literature on how nanofills and su bmi crons react to polishing procedures and surface challenges in vitro compared with microhybrids .
The paper has also given an overview of the compositional characteristics of all resin composites and polishing systems whose performance was presented herein .