Surface sealants are reported to ensure surface smoothness and improve the surface quality of composite restorations. These sealants should also reduce the bacterial adhesion on composite surfaces however, there is not much information regarding their performance on bulk-fill composite materials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface sealant application on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of various restorative materials. Disc-shaped samples were prepared from a compomer, a conventional composite and three bulk-fill composites. Specimens of each group were divided into two groups (n = 9): with/without surface sealant (Biscover LV, [BLV]). Surface roughness values were examined by profilometry and two samples of each group were examined for bacterial adhesion on a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Bacterial counts were calculated by both broth cultivation and microscopic images. Results were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni/Dunn tests. Following the BLV application, there was a decrease in the surface roughness values of all groups however, only Tetric N-Ceram Bulk and Beautifil-Bulk groups showed significantly smoother surfaces (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences among material groups without BLV application. Evaluating bacterial adhesion after BLV application, conventional composite had the lowest values among all followed by the compomer group. Beautifil-Bulk had significantly the highest bacterial adhesion (p < 0.05), followed by Tetric N-Ceram Bulk group. Without BLV application, there was no significant difference among bacterial adhesion values of groups (p > 0.05). CLSM images showed cell viability in groups. Bulk-fill composites showed higher bacterial adhesion than conventional composite and compomer materials. The surface sealant was found to be highly effective in lowering bacterial adhesion, but not so superior in smoothing the surfaces of restorative materials. So, surface sealants could be used on the restorations of patients with high caries risk.

据报道，表面密封剂可确保表面光滑度并改善复合修复体的表面质量。这些密封胶还应减少细菌在复合材料表面上的附着力，但是，关于它们在散装复合材料上的性能方面没有太多信息。这项研究的目的是评估表面密封剂的应用对各种修复材料的表面粗糙度和细菌粘附的影响。圆盘状样品由复合体，常规复合材料和三种填充复合材料制成。每组的样品分为两组（n = 9）：有/无表面密封剂（Biscover LV，[BLV]）。通过轮廓测定法检查表面粗糙度值，并在共聚焦激光扫描显微镜（CLSM）上检查每组的两个样品的细菌粘附力。通过肉汤培养和显微图像计算细菌计数。用单向方差分析和Bonferroni / Dunn测试分析结果。BLV施用后，所有组的表面粗糙度值均降低，但是，只有Tetric N-Ceram散装和Beautifil-散装组显示出明显更光滑的表面（p <0.001）。没有使用BLV的材料组之间没有显着差异。评估BLV施用后的细菌粘附力，常规复合材料的价值最低，其次是复合物组。Beautifil-Bulk具有最高的细菌粘附性（p <0.05），其次是Tetric N-Ceram Bulk组。如果不使用BLV，各组之间的细菌黏附值之间无显着差异（p> 0.05）。CLSM图像显示各组细胞的活力。散装填充复合材料比常规复合材料和复合材料显示出更高的细菌附着力。发现表面密封剂在降低细菌粘附方面非常有效，但在使修复材料的表面光滑方面却不是那么出色。因此，表面密封剂可用于龋齿风险高的患者的修复。