ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of the effects of different polishing systems on surface roughness and surface discoloration of various restorative materials.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stain susceptibility of a giomer and a particulate-filled injectable composite with one-step and multi-step polishing techniques, and color recovery after brushing and repolishing.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- The effect of polishing pastes on the surface roughness, microhardness, gloss, and color change of resin composites.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of color stability on resin composite specimens using different polishing kits: anFrontiers in dental medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the effects of different polishing systems on the surface roughness and discoloration of various composite resins, and to assess the effectiveness of repolishing procedures in reducing discoloration. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour different composite resins (giomer, nanohybrid, nanoceramic, microhybrid) were polished using various systems. Surface roughness was evaluated using mechanical profilometer, Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Surface morphology was examined by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). Samples were immersed in a coffee solution for staining, followed by repolishing. Color change (ΔE) values were recorded.
resultsSurface roughness and discoloration varied based on the composite type and polishing system. The smoothest surface was observed in the nanohybrid composite polished with OptiDisc (Ra: 0.59), while the roughest surface was seen in the nanoceramic composite polished with Lucida (Ra: 1.70). The highest discoloration occurred in the giomer with Enhance PoGo, while Twist Dia produced the most stain-resistant surfaces (p = 0.008). Repolishing with the OptiDisc significantly reduced discoloration, with ΔE values falling within clinically acceptable limits only in this group (p = 0.00671).
conclusionsMulti-step polishing systems, those containing aluminum oxide were more effective in achieving smoother surfaces and better color stability. Results varied according to the composite material and the polishing system used. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study emphasizes that different polishing systems may lead to differences that could potentially affect the clinical performance and aesthetic longevity of composite resins.
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.