Skip to main content
. 2024 Sep 30;37(2):162–171. doi: 10.54589/aol.37/2/162

Table 2. Mean (SD) of surface roughness (μm) of the different types of composite resins according to the finishing and polishing system and the immersion medium.

Experimental Groups Control (without polishing) Discs + felts Rubbers + felts
Filtek Z350 XT (Nanofilled)
Baseline (post-polishing) 0.276 (0.117) A 0.313(0.104) A 0.339(0.123) A
Final Water (post-immersion) 0.381 (0.221) a 0.416(0.153) a 0.457(0.242) * a
Coffee (post-immersion) 0.425 (0.209) * a 0.449(0.118) * a 0.385(0.186) * a
Estelite Omega (Suprananofilled )
Baseline (post-polishing) 0.306(0.143) A 0.416(0.153) B 0.464(0.144) B
Final Water (post-immersion) 0.223(0.085) a 0.467(0.149) a 0.665(0.253) a
Coffee (post-immersion) 0.254(0.143) a 0.576(0.251) a 0.521(0.155) a
Empress Direct (Nanohybrid)
Baseline (post-polishing) 0.185 (0.114) A 0.317 (0.094) B 0.385 (0.093) B
Final Water (post-immersion) 0.139 (0.054) a 0.325 (0.137) a 0.431 (0.103) a
Coffee (post-immersion) 0.237 (0.141) a 0.267 (0.090) a 0.433 (0.126) a
*

indicates significant difference in relation to the post-polishing value by Mann-Whitney. Equal lowercase letters indicate no significant difference between specimens immersed in distilled water or coffee by Mann-Whitney.

Different capital letters indícate a significant difference between finishing and polishing systems by Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls tests.