2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103837
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomized clinical split-mouth study on the performance of CAD/CAM-partial ceramic crowns luted with a self-adhesive resin cement or a universal adhesive and a conventional resin cement after 39 months

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The advancement in materials technology has remodeled the restorative/prosthetic dental treatments. The availability of increasingly performing restorative materials, along with the enhancement of adhesive cementation, has made possible the realization of minimally invasive restorations with high aesthetic standards, reinforced mechanical performances, and longer prognosis over time [ 1 , 2 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advancement in materials technology has remodeled the restorative/prosthetic dental treatments. The availability of increasingly performing restorative materials, along with the enhancement of adhesive cementation, has made possible the realization of minimally invasive restorations with high aesthetic standards, reinforced mechanical performances, and longer prognosis over time [ 1 , 2 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In line with the results of this study, previous studies reported a lower bond strength of self-adhesive RCs to dentin. 7, 14, 19 In addition, Scholz et al 20 reported inferior clinical performance after 39 months for self-adhesive resin cement compared to conventional resin cement with universal adhesive regarding retention, marginal adaptation, color stability, and marginal staining.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, Uludag et al reported lower microleakage at RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) interface than with Smartcem 2 (Dentsply, Charlotte, NC, USA) and SpeedCem (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schann, Liechtenstein) resin cements [ 12 ]. Numerous studies have investigated the adaptation of adhesive luting cements for crowns and veneers [ 13 , 14 , 15 ]. However, the evaluation of different adhesive resin cements in association with inlay restorations is scarce and, to our knowledge, there are no reports in the literature on the adaptation of adhesive resin cements for inlays using micro-CT evaluation methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%