Elsevier

Journal of Dentistry

Volume 26, Issue 3, March 1998, Pages 219-225
Journal of Dentistry

Fired ceramic inlays: a 6-year follow up

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00005-5Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate feldspathic ceramic inlays luted with dual-cured resin composite or glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement (GIC) during a 6-year follow-up.

Methods: One-hundred and eighteen Class II fired feldspathic ceramic inlays were placed in 50 patients. In each patient half of the inlays were luted with a dual-cured resin composite and the other half with a conventional glass ionomer cement. The inlays were evaluated clinically, according to modified USPHS criteria, at baseline, after 6 months and then annually over a 6-year period.

Results: Of the 115 inlays evaluated at 6 years, 12% in the resin composite group and 26% in the GIC group were assessed as having failed. The main reason for failure in both groups was partial fracture or total loss of the inlays. Secondary caries was found to be associated with three inlays in one high caries risk patient. One inlay was replaced because of postoperative sensitivity.

Conclusion: A relatively high and increasing failure rate was observed over the 6-year period of the study. The failure rate was more pronounced in the GIC group.

References (44)

  • J.F. Cvar et al.
  • S. Siegel
  • M.E. Jensen

    A two-year clinical study of posterior etched-porcelain resin-bonded restorations

    American Journal of Dentistry

    (1988)
  • M. Taleghani et al.

    Two-year clinical evaluation of direct porcelain inlays

    Journal of Dental Research

    (1989)
  • R. Christensen et al.

    2-year clinical comparison of 6 inlay systems

    Journal of Dental Research

    (1991)
  • C. Höglund et al.

    A clinical evaluation of adhesively luted ceramic inlays

    Swedish Dental Journal

    (1992)
  • M. Haas et al.

    Klinische und werkstoffkundliche erfahrungen mit komposit-, keramik-und goldinlays

    Deutsche Zahnärztliche Zeitung

    (1992)
  • M. Molin et al.

    A clinical evaluation of the Optec inlay system

    Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

    (1992)
  • M. Molin et al.

    A 3-year clinical follow-up study of a ceramic (Optec) inlay system

    Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

    (1996)
  • B.P. Isenberg et al.

    Three-year clinical evaluation of CAD/CAM restorations

    Journal Esthetic Dental Association

    (1992)
  • G. Sjögren et al.

    Ceramic inlays (Cerec) cemented with either a dual-cured or a chemically cured composite resin luting agent

    Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

    (1995)
  • S. Studer et al.

    Glass-ceramic inlays and onlays made by IPS-Empress: first clinical results

    Journal of Dental Research

    (1992)
  • Cited by (82)

    • Favorable residual stress induction by resin-cementation on dental porcelain

      2017, Dental Materials
      Citation Excerpt :

      Load-to-failure studies of anatomically representative restorations add little to the mechanistic understanding of resin-cement strengthening and cannot be used to guide materials-development or inform the profession [10,11]. From the results of the two direct clinical comparison studies [2,3], it has become accepted that adhesive cementation of monolithic dental-ceramic restorations fabricated from glassy/glass-ceramic substrates is essential to optimise restoration longevity. When adhesively coupled to the underlying tooth substrate, relatively ‘weak’ ceramic materials demonstrate significantly higher clinical survival rates compared with acid-base cement systems [2,3].

    • Influence of different adhesive protocols on ceramic bond strength and degree of conversion of resin cements

      2015, International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives
      Citation Excerpt :

      Adhesive protocols containing RelyX U100 produced degree of conversions values that were not statistically different between IPS e.MAX and IPS d.SIGN; for each ceramic system, adhesive protocols containing RelyX U100 produced conversion values that were not statistically different. Since proper adhesive bonding is a determinant factor regarding long-term success of several ceramic restorative procedures in dentistry [2,3,5–7,26–29] different resin cements were evaluated in an attempt to obtain further information about their behavior when distinct adhesive protocols and ceramic types are employed. Two-way ANOVA revealed that the adhesive protocols tested (p<0.001) and the different ceramic systems influenced ceramic bond strength.

    • Atmospheric moisture effects on the testing rate and cementation seating load following resin-strengthening of a soda lime glass analogue for dental porcelain

      2013, Journal of Dentistry
      Citation Excerpt :

      Clinical evidence to support the use of resin-based adhesive technologies for dental ceramics is evident in the findings of a comprehensive 14 year prospective study of 1444 Dicor restorations reported by Malament and Socransky1,2 and the results of a 6 year follow-up of 115 fired ceramic inlays reported by van Dijken et al.3 The authors demonstrated ceramic restorations were significantly more resistant to fracture when adhesively bonded to the prepared tooth structure using resin-based materials compared with acid–base cements.1–3

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text