View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
Title Polishability Of Nanofilled Resin Composites Compared To Microfilled Resin Composites
Clinical Question In an adult patient requiring an esthetic resin composite restoration, would the use of nanofilled resin composites produce a better polishability compared to microfilled resin composites longterm?
Clinical Bottom Line The use of nanofilled composites has shown to produce a better polishability in some clinical settings, however, the validity of the evidence suggests a need for further clinical investigations. (See Comments on the CAT below)
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 15736840Yap/2004N/ALab Study
Key resultsAt all time intervals, composite materials based on both the ormocer and nanomer technology were smoother than all other materials evaluated. This shows that nanomer technology may have an effect on polishability of the composite materials.
#2) 17635330Da Costa/2007N/ALab Study
Key resultsThe nanofill (Supreme) and minifill (Esthet-X) composites presented a surface roughness comparable to a microfill (Durafill), therefore no significant differences between the two were of importance. These results were independent of the polishing system used, and a gloss comparable to a microfill, when polished with a one-step system (Pogo).
#3) 17877626Senawongse/2007N/ALab Study
Key resultsFor the nanofill resin composites, there were no significant differences in surface roughness between the two polishing methods or among the unpolished surfaces, therefore no matter the polishing method did not play a significant role in the outcome. The smoothest surfaces after polishing and brushing were found through the use of nanofill resin composites made with nanoclusters demonstrated.
Evidence Search Search nanofill composite resin Search (#13) AND #14Search "Composite Resins"[Mesh]Search "Dental Polishing"[Mesh]
Comments on
The Evidence
Although the Yap article did consider the time involvement of the polishability of resin composites compared to the other clinical trials found, there is some discrepancy of results between the articles. The Yap and Senawongse articles show that there is some advantage to using nanofilled composites, but the Da Costa article states that the two are comparable. No randomized controlled trials or meta-analysis were done.
Applicability There is some slight evidence for the use of nanofilled composites over microfilled resins in terms of long-term effects on polishability. Esthetically, the two types of filler material seem to be comparable in terms of surface roughness. Therefore, the use of nanofilled technology in filler materials shows some advantage over microfilled resins, although more investigation into the subject would be required to validate the latest evidence.
Specialty/Discipline (General Dentistry) (Prosthodontics)
Keywords Nanofill, Polishing
ID# 854
Date of submission: 04/12/2011spacer
E-mail koenigkl@uthscsa.livemail.edu
Author Kennon L. Koenig
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author Rita Renee Parma, DDS
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail parma@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
Comments on the CAT
post a comment
by Julie Hull (San Antonio, TX) on 10/03/2014
A PubMed search on polishability of nanofilled and microfilled composites was performed in September 2014. A more recent publication was found: Barakah, 2014, PubMed: 24721503. This in vitro study was conducted on forty five samples of fabricated composite disks composed of nanocomposite resins, nanofilled composites and microhybrid composites and showed that nanofilled composites did not necessarily show low surface roughness as compared to microfilled composites.

Return to Found CATs list