Abstract
Background: To compare the surface roughness and microhardness of Ceram.x® SphereTEC™ one and Filtek Z350 XT after in-office bleaching with Pola office. Methods: Twenty samples each of (10 mm diameter and 2 mm height) Ceram.x® SphereTEC™ one and Filtek Z350 XT were prepared. The samples were subjected to three bleaching sessions with 35% hydrogen peroxide (Pola office) with a seven-day interval between each session. Surface roughness and microhardness of the prepared samples prior to and after the bleaching regimen were measured using a profilometer and Vickers hardness tester, respectively. Results: A significant reduction (p <0.001) in the surface hardness of Filtek Z350 XT from 27.67 ± 2.10 to 17.83 ± 1.36 Vickers hardness number (VHN) was observed after the bleaching whereas no significant reduction in surface hardness was observed with Ceram.x® SphereTEC™ one. The adjusted mean (estimated marginal mean) microhardness after bleaching for Ceram.x (®) SphereTEC™ one (35.79 ± 1.45) was significantly higher than Filtek Z350 XT (19.54 ± 1.45) (p < 0.001). However, in-office bleaching of these materials did not significantly alter their surface roughness. Conclusions: In office-bleaching with 35% hydrogen peroxide can reduce the microhardness of nanofilled composite. However, the surface roughness was not influenced by the bleaching procedure in both nanohybrid and nanofilled composite resin materials.