Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after six years: clinical behavior
- PMID: 11203857
Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after six years: clinical behavior
Abstract
Ceramic inlays are an esthetic substitute for large amalgam and other metallic restorations. This controlled clinical study evaluated the performance of IPS Empress inlays and onlays with cuspal replacements and proximal margins below the cementoenamel junction over six years of clinical service. Six dentists placed 96 ceramic restorations in 34 patients. Luting was accomplished using the enamel-etch-technique, a dentin bonding system (Syntac Classic) and four different composite systems. The restorations were assessed by two calibrated investigators using modified USPHS criteria at baseline (96 restorations), one (96), two (95), four (89) and six years (67). Seven of the 96 restorations investigated had to be replaced (failure rate 7%; Kaplan-Meier): Five inlays suffered cohesive bulk fractures and two teeth required endodontic treatment. After six years of clinical service, significant deterioration (Friedman 2-way ANOVA; p < 0.05) was found for marginal adaptation of the remaining restorations. Ninety-four percent of the surviving restorations exhibited marginal deficiencies, independent of the luting composite. Neither the absence of enamel margins, nor cuspal replacement significantly affected the quality of the restorations.
Similar articles
-
Clinical performance of bonded leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years.Dent Mater. 2005 Mar;21(3):262-71. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.009. Dent Mater. 2005. PMID: 15705433 Clinical Trial.
-
IPS Empress inlays and onlays after four years--a clinical study.J Dent. 1999 Jul;27(5):325-31. doi: 10.1016/s0300-5712(98)00059-1. J Dent. 1999. PMID: 10377606 Clinical Trial.
-
Ceramic inlays bonded with two adhesives after 4 years.Dent Mater. 2006 Jan;22(1):13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.02.013. Epub 2005 Aug 24. Dent Mater. 2006. PMID: 16122784 Clinical Trial.
-
Adhesive luting of indirect restorations.Am J Dent. 2000 Nov;13(Spec No):60D-76D. Am J Dent. 2000. PMID: 11763920 Review.
-
All-ceramic restorations: classification and clinical evaluations.Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999 Dec;20(12):1115-24, 1126 passim; quiz 1136. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999. PMID: 10850265 Review.
Cited by
-
Partial ceramic crowns. Influence of preparation design and luting material on margin integrity--a scanning electron microscopic study.Clin Oral Investig. 2005 Mar;9(1):8-17. doi: 10.1007/s00784-004-0276-1. Epub 2004 Aug 10. Clin Oral Investig. 2005. PMID: 15309565
-
Seven-year clinical performance of CEREC-2 all-ceramic CAD/CAM restorations placed within deeply destroyed teeth.Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Oct;16(5):1413-24. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0642-8. Epub 2011 Dec 7. Clin Oral Investig. 2012. PMID: 22143480
-
Indirect composite restorations luted with two different procedures: A ten years follow up clinical trial.J Clin Exp Dent. 2015 Feb 1;7(1):e54-9. doi: 10.4317/jced.51604. eCollection 2015 Feb. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015. PMID: 25810842 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of incorporation of silane in the bonding agent on the repair potential of machinable esthetic blocks.Eur J Dent. 2014 Jan;8(1):44-52. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.126240. Eur J Dent. 2014. PMID: 24966745 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of surface conditioning protocols on the repair bond strength of resin composite to CAD/CAM blocks: Bioactive-glass, silica-coated alumina, or aluminum oxide?Eur J Oral Sci. 2025 Aug;133(4):e70016. doi: 10.1111/eos.70016. Epub 2025 May 13. Eur J Oral Sci. 2025. PMID: 40358426 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Other Literature Sources