The effect of polishing pastes on composite resin surfaces. A SEM study

CLINICALLY, COMPOSITE RESINS can be polished to a smooth surface at the time of placement using a variety of polishing methods. Subsequently maintaining the finish on recalls needs to be evaluated. The purpose of this investigation was to compare surface textures of a small particle composite resin (average particle size 5 microns) after polishing with prophylaxis and polishing pastes. Each specimen of the small particle composite resin, PrismaFil, was finished and polished to a smooth surface with Soflex discs. This was the control polish. The specimens were then polished with a rotating rubber prophylaxis cup with seven different prophylaxis and polishing pastes. All the samples were then prepared for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluation and photographed at 750x to compare the effects of polishing on the surfaces of composite resins. SEM photographs were also made of a sample polished with Soflex discs (SF) and with a dry rubber cup (RC). The seven prophylaxis and polishing pastes were Command Ultrafine Lustre Paste (CULP), Coral Phosphate Prophylaxis Paste (CPPP), NuPro fine (NPF), NuPro medium (NPM), Prophydent (PD), Rembrandt Polishing Paste (RPLP) and Rembrandt Prophylaxis Paste (RPXP). The SEM photographs were rated by independent evaluators according to surface roughness from the smoothest to roughest surfaces. The results of the evaluator ratings determined that the composite resin surface gets rougher with the use of any polishing paste. The smoothest to roughest surface by groupings were: (SF)-(RPLP)-(CULP, RC)-(RPXP)-(NPF, CPPP, PD)-(NPM).