Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Research and Education| Volume 125, ISSUE 3, P469.e1-469.e6, March 2021

Download started.


Impact of simulated toothbrushing on surface properties of chairside CAD-CAM materials: An in vitro study

Published:December 02, 2020DOI:


      Statement of problem

      Chairside computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) materials that do not require any firing steps are a promising option to expedite restoration production; however, little information is available to determine the most suitable material for each clinical situation.


      The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of simulated toothbrushing on surface gloss, roughness, and wear of chairside CAD-CAM materials.

      Material and methods

      Disk-shaped specimens (n=15) were prepared of the following materials: ENA—VITA Enamic; LAV—Lava Ultimate; EMP—IPS Empress CAD; CER—Cerasmart; GRA—Grandio blocs. Gloss (Gloss Unit—GU) and surface roughness (Ra—μm) were evaluated before and after simulated toothbrushing (100 000 strokes). Wear (μm) was assessed by contact profilometry. Additional analyses of microhardness by scanning electron microscopy were also performed. Data were analyzed with 2-way repeated measures ANOVA test for roughness and gloss, and 1-way ANOVA for wear (α=.05). To estimate the correlation between Ra and GU, the Pearson correlation was calculated.


      Before brushing, CER showed the lowest Ra (P<.001), and GRA the lowest GU values. After brushing, the feldspathic ceramic-based materials (ENA and EMP) presented the highest gloss, whereas the ceramic group (EMP) showed the lowest Ra. Before and after brushing, GRA showed the lowest GU values. Higher wear values were found for the composite resin groups (CER>GRA), with the exception of LAVA, which was similar to ENA, and EMP showing improved wear resistance. A strong negative correlation (-0.925) between GU and Ra values was detected (P<.001).


      The materials containing a glass phase (ENA and EMP) presented higher wear resistance, higher gloss, and lower roughness after brushing than the other materials tested. The correlation test showed that the higher the surface roughness, the lower the gloss.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Flury S.
        • Diebold E.
        • Peutzfeldt A.
        • Lussi A.
        Effect of artificial toothbrushing and water storage on the surface roughness and micromechanical properties of tooth-colored CAD-CAM materials.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117: 767-774
        • Heintze S.D.
        • Forjanic M.
        • Ohmiti K.
        • Rousson V.
        Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load.
        Dent Mater. 2010; 26: 306-319
        • Mörmann W.H.
        • Stawarczyk B.
        • Ender A.
        • Sener B.
        • Attin T.
        • Mehl A.
        Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness.
        J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2013; 20: 113-125
        • Bottino M.A.
        • Campos F.
        • Ramos N.C.
        • Rippe M.P.
        • Valandro L.F.
        • Melo R.M.
        Inlays made from a hybrid material: adaptation and bond strengths.
        Oper Dent. 2015; 40: E83-E91
        • Chavali R.
        • Nejat A.H.
        • Lawson N.C.
        Machinability of CAD-CAM materials.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 118: 194-199
        • Bollen C.M.L.
        • Lambrechts P.
        • Quirynen M.
        Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature.
        Dent Mater. 1997; 13: 258-269
        • Lu H.
        • Roeder L.B.
        • Lei L.
        • Powers J.M.
        Effect of surface roughness on stain resistance of dental resin composites.
        J Esthet Restor Dent. 2005; 17 (discussion 109): 102-108
        • Cazzaniga G.
        • Ottobelli M.
        • Ionescu A.
        • Garcia-Godoy F.
        • Brambilla E.
        Surface properties of resin-based composite materials and biofilm formation: a review of the current literature.
        Am J Dent. 2015; 28: 311-320
        • Beyth N.
        • Bahir R.
        • Matalon S.
        • Domb A.J.
        • Weiss E.I.
        Streptococcus mutans biofilm changes surface-topography of resin composites.
        Dent Mater. 2008; 24: 732-736
        • Augusto M.G.
        • de Andrade G.S.
        • Caneppele T.M.F.
        • Borges A.B.
        • Torres C.R.G.
        Nanofilled bis-acryl composite resin materials: is it necessary to polish?.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 124: 494.e1-494.e5
        • Lee Y.K.
        • Lu H.
        • Oguri M.
        • Powers J.M.
        Changes in gloss after simulated generalized wear of composite resins.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94: 370-376
        • Kamonkhantikul K.
        • Arksornnukit M.
        • Lauvahutanon S.
        • Takahashi H.
        Toothbrushing alters the surface roughness and gloss of composite resin CAD/CAM blocks.
        Dent Mater J. 2016; 35: 225-232
        • Mitra S.B.
        • Wu D.
        • Holmes B.N.
        An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134: 1382-1390
        • Rocha R.
        • Fagundes T.
        • Caneppele T.
        • Bresciani E.
        Perceptibility and acceptability of surface gloss variations in dentistry.
        Oper Dent. 2019; 45: 134-142
        • American Dental Association
        Product review: polishing systems.
        American Dental Association, Chicago2010: 16
        • American Dental Association
        Guidelines for submission of resin composite materials for posterior restorations.
        in: American Dental Association Council on dental materials, instruments and equipment. American Dental Association, Chicago1989: 649-651
        • Rosentritt M.
        • Sawaljanow A.
        • Behr M.
        • Kolbeck C.
        • Preis V.
        Effect of tooth brush abrasion and thermo-mechanical loading on direct and indirect veneer restorations.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19: 53-60
        • Say E.C.
        • Civelek A.
        • Nobecourt A.
        • Ersoy M.
        • Guleryuz C.
        Wear and microhardness of different resin composite materials.
        Oper Dent. 2003; 28: 628-634
        • Da Costa J.
        • Adams-Belusko A.
        • Riley K.
        • Ferracane J.L.
        The effect of various dentifrices on surface roughness and gloss of resin composites.
        J Dent. 2010; 38: e123-e128
        • Garcia-Godoy F.
        • Garcia-Godoy A.
        • Garcia-Godoy C.
        Effect of a desensitizing paste containing 8% arginine and calcium carbonate on the surface roughness of dental materials and human dental enamel.
        Am J Dent. 2009; 22: 21A-24A
        • ISO/TR 14569-1:2007
        Dental materials — guidance on testing of wear — part 1: wear by toothbrushing.
        International Organization for Standardization, Geneva2007: 5
        • Callister W.D.
        • Rethwisch D.G.
        Materials science and engineering: an introduction.
        9th ed. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey2013: 960