Impact of in vitro findings on clinical protocols for the adhesion of CAD-CAM blocks: A systematic integrative review and meta-analysis

Calheiros-Lobo, Maria João; Carbas, R.J.C.; Silva, Lucas F. M. da; Pinho, Teresa

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.08.024

Cited by 7 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the existing data (p < 0.05), it was accepted that self-adhesive resin-matrix cement systems are effective in cementing CAD-CAM blocks on different substrates and rejected the hypothesis that self-adhesive resin-matrix cement performs better than conventional resin-matrix cement. Moreover, it was not possible to establish a luting cement that suits a particular CAD-CAM block, or if there is a better SARC adequate for all situations, which agrees with a recent publication for luting protocols [11].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Qualitative analysis of the risk of bias assessment was performed by individually scoring the ten selected parameters using the following criteria: (0) clearly mentioned, (1) present but not accurately mentioned, and (2) not mentioned. Global scoring was categorized as low (0-4), medium (5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12), high (13)(14)(15)(16)(17), or very high (18-20) risk of bias.…”

Section: Quality Assessment Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The remaining 29 articles [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]14,22,[25][26][27][28]31,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] were selected for the quality analysis. Manual research also retrieved three studies [30,45,46], three randomized clinical trials [24,47,48], six reviews [15,23,29,[49][50][51], and three meta-analyses [11,12,20], which were used to broaden the introduction and discussion sessions. The selection process agreed with the PRISMA Statement, as shown in Figure 1.…”

Section: General Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Today, Lava Ultimate is still indicated for inlays, onlays, and veneers, but the manufacturer has removed the crown indication since June 2015 because of the higher rates of premature debonding. Recently, a meta-analysis [11] revealed as a better protocol for Lava Ultimate, sandblasting with 50 µm Al 2 O 3 and an SARC (G-Cem LinkForce) + Universal Primer (G-Multi Primer), and as the worst protocol, the use of no sandblasting and an SARC (RelyX Unicem 2) used alone. In contrast, the surface treatment had little effect on the bonding to Vita Enamic (a ceramic structure infiltrated with resin).…”

Section: Surface Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CAD-CAM technology in dental medicine is developing, allowing protocol standardization and a predictable quality of dental restorations while reducing the production price [1,2], aiming to deliver materials at their highest quality [3], and enhancing the outgrowth of highly esthetic and functional restorative materials [4][5][6]. This technology has boosted impression and casting procedures [6][7][8][9], supplying easier and quicker indirect restorations, frequently without the requirement for provisional restorations or dental laboratories, allowing single-visit [4,8,9] inlays, onlays, veneers, or even full-contour crowns fabricated with several alternative materials with high survival rates [10][11][12]. Candidate materials may incorporate lithium disilicate glass-ceramic, leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic, feldspathic ceramic, zirconia, resin-matrix composites, polymer-infiltrated ceramic, or titanium [1,13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) are used because of their mechanical properties, ease of cementation protocols, and lack of requirements for acid conditioning or adhesive systems. SARCs are generally dual-cured, photoactivated, and self-cured, with a slight increase in acidic pH, allowing self-adhesiveness and increasing resistance to hydrolysis. This systematic review assessed the adhesive strength of SARC systems luted to different substrates and computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic blocks. The PubMed/MedLine and Science Direct databases were searched using the Boolean formula [((dental or tooth) AND (self-adhesive) AND (luting or cement) AND CAD-CAM) NOT (endodontics or implants)]. Of the 199 articles obtained, 31 were selected for the quality assessment. Lava Ultimate (resin matrix filled with nanoceramic) and Vita Enamic (polymer-infiltrated ceramic) blocks were the most tested. Rely X Unicem 2 was the most tested resin cement, followed by Rely X Unicem > Ultimate > U200, and μTBS was the test most used. The meta-analysis confirmed the substrate-dependent adhesive strength of SARCs, with significant differences between them and between SARCs and conventional resin-based adhesive cement (α < 0.05). SARCs are promising. However, one must be aware of the differences in the adhesive strengths. An appropriate combination of materials must be considered to improve the durability and stability of restorations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Quality Assessment Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: General Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Surface Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fracture resistance of additively or subtractively manufactured resin-based definitive crowns: Effect of restorative material, resin cement, and cyclic loading

Çakmak,

Donmez,

Molinero-Mourelle

et al. 2024

Dental Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shear Bond Strength of Simulated Single-Retainer Resin-Bonded Bridges Made of Four CAD/CAM Materials for Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis Rehabilitation

Calheiros-Lobo,

Carbas

et al. 2023

Eur J Dent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Maxillary lateral incisor agenesis (MLIA), treated orthodontically by space opening, requires complimentary aesthetic rehabilitation. Resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) can be equated as interim rehabilitation until skeletal maturity is achieved to place an implant-supported crown or as definitive rehabilitation in case of financial restrictions or implant contraindications. Scientific evidence of the best material must be confirmed in specific clinical situations. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials are promising versatile restorative options. This study aimed to identify a straightforward material to deliver interim or definitive RBBs for nonprepared tooth replacement in MLIA. Materials and Methods Single-retainer RBB made from CAD/CAM ceramic blocks (Vita Enamic [ENA], Suprinity [SUP], and zirconia [Y-ZPT]) and a three-dimensional (3D) printed material (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene [ABS]) were evaluated by shear bond strength (SBS) and mode of failure, after adherence to an artificial tooth with RelyX Ultimate used in a three-step adhesive strategy. Statistical Analysis The load to fracture (N) was recorded, and the mean shear stress (MPa) was calculated with standard deviations (SD) for each group and compared between materials using boxplot graphics. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey–Kramer post hoc test was used to compare the differences (α = 0.05). A meta-analysis focusing on CAD/CAM materials evaluated the magnitude of the difference between groups based on differences in means and effect sizes (α = 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]; Z-value = 1.96). Failure mode was determined by microscopic observation and correlated with the maximum load to fracture of the specimen. Results The mean ± SD SBS values were ENA (24.24 ± 9.05 MPa) < ABS (24.01 ± 1.94 MPa) < SUP (29.17 ± 4.78 MPa) < Y-ZPT (37.43 ± 12.20 MPa). The failure modes were mainly adhesive for Y-ZPT, cohesive for SUP and ENA, and cohesive with plastic deformation for ABS. Conclusion Vita Enamic, Suprinity, Y-ZPT zirconia, and 3D-printed ABS RBBs are optional materials for rehabilitating MLIA. The option for each material is conditioned to estimate the time of use and necessity of removal for orthodontic or surgical techniques.

show abstract

Impact of in vitro findings on clinical protocols for the adhesion of CAD-CAM blocks: A systematic integrative review and meta-analysis

Cited by 7 publications

References 43 publications

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Fracture resistance of additively or subtractively manufactured resin-based definitive crowns: Effect of restorative material, resin cement, and cyclic loading

Shear Bond Strength of Simulated Single-Retainer Resin-Bonded Bridges Made of Four CAD/CAM Materials for Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis Rehabilitation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About