Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
201,683 studies31 sourcesUpdated 15 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Polymers

Surface Roughness and Color Stability of S-PRG Giomer Flowable Restoratives Versus Nanofill Resin Composites After Simulated Toothbrushing: An In Vitro Study

  • Yasser Merdad1
  • Razan Alharbi1
  • Abeer Tashkandi1
  • Renad Bakhaider2,3,4
  • Asaad H. Doum5
  • Mohammed A. Hanbazazah5
5 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80209, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
  2. 2King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh 11426, Saudi Arabia
  3. 3Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dental Sciences, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia
  4. 4Ministry of the National Guard–Health Affairs, Riyadh 11426, Saudi Arabia
  5. 5Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
Open at sourceDOICite

Abstract

This in vitro study compared surface roughness (Ra) and CIEDE2000 color change (ΔE00) of two giomer flowables with surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler, Beautifil Flow Plus F00 and Beautifil Flow Plus X F00, and two nanofill resin composites, Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable and the packable Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal, during simulated toothbrushing. Ten discs per material were cured against glass without finishing or polishing and brushed for 10,000 linear cycles at 2.5 N. Ra and color were measured at baseline and every 2500 cycles; scanning electron microscopy illustrated the surfaces. Beautifil Flow Plus X became smoother after the first 2500 cycles (p ≤ 0.001), and no material became significantly rougher. At 10,000 cycles, Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal was rougher than the three flowables. ΔE00 differed among materials (p < 0.001) but not between intervals; Beautifil Flow Plus X changed the least (mean 0.408), less than Beautifil Flow Plus (0.886) and Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal (0.768), and no disc reached the 50:50% acceptability threshold of 1.8. Without an unbrushed control, ΔE00 reflects brushing, storage, and measurement combined. Under this protocol, Beautifil Flow Plus X became smoother and changed color the least.

Related

  1. Friction Stability and Wear Behavior of Te NW–TiB2/Epoxy Composites
    Ahmet Sarucan, Hayrettin Düzcükoğlu, Bayram Ünal +2
    PolymersPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textMaterials & polymersEurope PMC
  2. Sunlight-driven removal of tetracycline over l-histidine–MgO–AgI composites: synthesis, morphological insight, and enhanced thermal stability
    Bristi Dutta, Mohammad Mizanur Rahman Khan, Jae-Ho Jeong
    RSC AdvancesPeer-reviewedCC BY 3.0Full textGeneral chemistryPMC
  3. Upcycling Secondary Cellulosic Fibres and Post-Industrial Recycled Polypropylene from Household Appliance Manufacturing into Circular Composites with Enhanced Dimensional Stability
    Carmen Martínez-García, Vesna Žepič Bogataj, Ana B. López +4
    PolymersPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Materials & polymersCrossref
  4. Optical Stability of Injectable Resin Composites with Different Shade-Matching Strategies
    Buse Kesgin, Başak Yazkan
    PolymersPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Materials & polymersCrossref
  5. The balance of thermal conductivity and stability of diamond/Cu composites through interfacial design of Cr–CuCr dual coatings
    Wentao Hu, Zengkai Jiao, Kaitang Huang +9
    Journal of Materials Research and TechnologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND5 citedMaterials & polymersOpenAlex

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{merdad2026surface,
  title = {{Surface Roughness and Color Stability of S-PRG Giomer Flowable Restoratives Versus Nanofill Resin Composites After Simulated Toothbrushing: An In Vitro Study}},
  author = {Yasser Merdad and Razan Alharbi and Abeer Tashkandi and Renad Bakhaider and Asaad H. Doum and Mohammed A. Hanbazazah},
  journal = {Polymers},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3390/polym18212615},
  url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/18/21/2615},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Surface Roughness and Color Stability of S-PRG Giomer Flowable Restoratives Versus Nanofill Resin Composites After Simulated Toothbrushing: An In Vitro Study
AU  - Yasser Merdad
AU  - Razan Alharbi
AU  - Abeer Tashkandi
AU  - Renad Bakhaider
AU  - Asaad H. Doum
AU  - Mohammed A. Hanbazazah
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/22
JO  - Polymers
DO  - 10.3390/polym18212615
UR  - https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/18/21/2615
AB  - This in vitro study compared surface roughness (Ra) and CIEDE2000 color change (ΔE00) of two giomer flowables with surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler, Beautifil Flow Plus F00 and Beautifil Flow Plus X F00, and two nanofill resin composites, Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable and the packable Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal, during simulated toothbrushing. Ten discs per material were cured against glass without finishing or polishing and brushed for 10,000 linear cycles at 2.5 N. Ra and color were measured at baseline and every 2500 cycles; scanning electron microscopy illustrated the surfaces. Beautifil Flow Plus X became smoother after the first 2500 cycles (p ≤ 0.001), and no material became significantly rougher. At 10,000 cycles, Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal was rougher than the three flowables. ΔE00 differed among materials (p < 0.001) but not between intervals; Beautifil Flow Plus X changed the least (mean 0.408), less than Beautifil Flow Plus (0.886) and Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal (0.768), and no disc reached the 50:50% acceptability threshold of 1.8. Without an unbrushed control, ΔE00 reflects brushing, storage, and measurement combined. Under this protocol, Beautifil Flow Plus X became smoother and changed color the least.
SN  - 2073-4360
ER  -