## 4 Discussion  
The CAD/CAM technique has a growing role in reconstructive dentistry. A wide range of constantly evolving materials is used to obtain desired properties for restorations [40]. These include good aesthetics, biocompatibility, marginal adaptation and sufficient mechanical resistance. This method is gaining popularity among dentists around the world; however, not many studies on surface treatment can be found. Surface modifications can be either physical--changing topography or morphology-- or chemical, such as by layer deposition. The aim of surface modification is to create a specific chemical and physical environment that offers a favourable cellular response in the surrounding tissues [41]. The study by [PERSON] et al. demonstrated statistically significant differences in the surface roughness of both composite and ceramic materials for CAD/CAM technology implicated by surface polishing [42]. A series of experiments were conducted by researchers to assess the efficacy of different polishing systems. These included spiral polishers (Diacomp FeatherLite/Brasseler), rubber cup polishers (Enhance/Dentsply Caulk) and brush-paste polishers (Diashine/VH Technologies). Surface roughness in the form of arithmetic mean height (Sa) and squared mean height (Sq) was evaluated using a confocal laser microscope. The authors came to the conclusion that the finished surfaces exhibited a markedly reduced level of roughness in comparison to the milled surfaces for all materials. Generally, the  
Figure 7: Water contact angle of polished and non-polished CAD/CAM blocks. brush-paste polishing technique and the use of spiral polishers yielded the lowest surface roughness values for their evaluated CAD/CAM materials. The application of different processes and surface treatments has been found to have a significant impact on the maximum contact stresses of the lithium disilicate glass-ceramic CAD/CAM material [43]. The findings indicate that surfaces obtained by CAD/CAM milling, polishing and sintering exhibited increased contact stresses and the least fatigue damage, thereby demonstrating superior fatigue performance compared to the other processed ceramic surfaces. The authors emphasize the impact of surface treatment on the subsequent mechanical damage to the material. Biological response may be influenced by surface characteristics, including topography and chemistry. In this study, we can observe higher WCA values for polished materials. However, the precise degree of hydrophilicity that optimizes biological and clinical outcomes remains uncertain. The review by [PERSON] et al. indicates that recent studies suggest that increased surface hydrophilicity may facilitate the integration of hard and soft tissue with dental implants, potentially accelerating healing and promoting early osseointegration [44]. The values of the physicochemical parameters of modern biomaterials can be compared to those observed in natural tissues. The mean WCA value for human enamel is dependent upon the presence of an acquired pellicle, with values ranging from 47.2 to 60.2 [45]. Possible complications after the implantation of biomaterials, dental implants or restorative materials include the risk of developing infections. The implanted biomaterial is susceptible to microbial colonization, which may lead to the formation of biofilm structures. Biofilms can lead to tissue destruction and failure of the therapeutic process, as well as carrying the risk of systemic infection [46]. Oral microorganisms have strong adhesive abilities. That is why it is so important to create materials or alter them to make them less susceptible to the adhesion of microorganisms and biofilm formation [47]. This study assessed the adhesion and biofilm formation abilities of _S. mutans_, _L. rhamns_ and _C. albicans_. To assess the adhesive ability, a qualitative method (calculation of the CFU/mL value) was used. The highest CFU/mL values--3.9 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) and 4.15 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\)--were denoted for _C.