ArticleMicroscopy research and technique2021
Surface evaluations of a nanocomposite after different finishing and polishing systems for anterior and posterior restorations.
Article in Microscopy research and technique, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of simulated gastric acid exposure on surface characteristics and color stability of flowable and packable bulk-fill composites.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Direct and Semi-Direct Composite Techniques in Posterior Teeth: A Two-Year Follow-Up Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Influence of Composite Polishing Pastes on Surface Roughness and Their Stability After Simulated Tooth Brushing.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Impact of different polishing techniques on surface roughness, gloss, and microhardness of zirconium oxide reinforced flowable bulk-fill resin composite: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Gastric acid challenge: Mechanical proficiency and surface gloss of tooth-colored restorative materials.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of Finishing Protocol on Obtaining and Maintaining Gloss in Four Nanohybrid Resin Composites.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Surface evaluations of a nanocomposite after different finishing and polishing systems for anterior and posterior restorations.Microscopy research and technique · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the effects of different finishing and polishing (F/P) systems on gloss and surface morphology of a new nanocomposite. Thirty discs of Filtek Universal Restorative material (3 M, ESPE) were prepared and divided into six groups (n = 5). Group A and B followed F/P protocols for anterior restorations, whereas Group C and D for posterior ones. Group E represented the control (covered by Mylar strip) and Group F represented the nanocomposite placement by means of clinical hand instruments; Groups E and F did not undergo F/P procedures. Among the polished groups, Group B showed the highest values (68.54 ± 7.54 GU), followed by Group A and D (46.87 ± 5.52 GU; 53.76 ± 2.65 GU). Finally, Group C (37.38 ± 4.93 GU) displayed the lowest results. Overall, Group E showed the highest gloss values (93.45 ± 8.27 GU), while Group F presented the lowest ones (1.74 ± 0.64 GU). Surface analysis revealed that Group A, C, and D displayed a smooth surface. Group B showed the lowest irregularities. Group E exhibited the most uniform superficial morphology. On the other hand, Group F displayed the most irregular one. In conclusion, using the tested material, only two protocols achieved appropriate gloss values. Then, clinicians might use the protocols of Group B and Group D, for anterior and posterior restorations, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.