The Influence of Different Polishing Systems on the Gloss and Surface Roughness of Two Distinct Nano-Filled...

To evaluate the influence of different polishing systems on the surface roughness and gloss of two nano-filled resin composites, and to investigate the effect of a modeling agent (Ceramage) on surface roughness.

Two nano-filled resin composites, Filtek Z350 XT and Palfique LX5, were used. Composite discs (8 mm diameter, 3 mm depth) were fabricated, and four polishing systems, Super Snap X-Treme, Diacomp Plus Twist, OptraGloss, and Enhance, were used. Polishing was performed by a trained operator at controlled speed and pressure. After polishing, the Ceramage modeling agent was applied on the surface using a #4 universal brush. Surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a 3D optical microscope using vertical scanning interferometry, and gloss (GU) was measured with a gloss meter at a 60° angle. Surface roughness measurements were taken before and after application of the Ceramage modeling agent. Two-way ANOVA was used to evaluate the effects of composite type and polishing system on surface roughness and gloss, followed by Tukey's HSD post hoc tests. A paired-samples t-test was used to compare roughness values before and after modeling agent application. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Both composite type and polishing system significantly affected surface roughness and gloss (p < 0.001). Overall, Filtek Z350 XT exhibited lower surface roughness and higher gloss than Palfique LX5 across all polishing protocols. OptraGloss and Diacomp Plus Twist produced the smoothest surfaces and highest gloss, whereas Enhance and Super Snap X-Treme yielded rougher surfaces and lower gloss. In addition, the application of the Ceramage modeling agent significantly reduced surface roughness in all groups (p < 0.001), with the most pronounced effect in specimens polished with the rougher systems (Enhance and Super Snap X-Treme).

The type of nano-filled composite and polishing system substantially influences surface roughness and gloss. OptraGloss and Diacomp Plus Twist deliver superior surface quality, whereas Enhance and Super Snap X-Treme yield less favorable results. The Ceramage modeling agent effectively reduces surface roughness, particularly after rough polishing protocols. Tailoring polishing protocols to specific composite materials is essential to optimize esthetic and functional outcomes. Further clinical studies are warranted to validate these findings under intraoral conditions.