Two‐year performance of CAD/CAM fabricated resin composite inlay restorations: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the 2‐year clinical performance of computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) resin composite inlay restorations in comparison with direct resin composite restorations. Materials and methods In 44 patients, 120 class II (mesio‐occlusal/disto‐occlusal) cavities were randomly assigned into two groups; CAD/CAM resin composite inlay group (Lava Ultimate), direct resin composite group (Clearfil Majesty Posterior). Clinical evaluations were performed after 1 week, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years according to the FDI criteria. The data were analyzed using Friedman's ANOVA and Mann‐Whitney U tests (α = .05). Results In 41 patients, 114 restorations were evaluated at the second year (recall rate 93.2%). All restorations were ideal or clinically acceptable. At the first year, considering all criteria, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups. However, there was a significant difference in terms of surface luster at second year, in favor of inlay restorations (P = .015). The marginal staining of resin composites increased after 2 years (P = .046), but there was no significant difference between the groups. Conclusions Except the surface luster, 2‐year clinical performance of CAD/CAM resin composite inlay restorations was found similar to direct resin composite restorations according to FDI criteria Clinical Significance The clinical performance of CAD/CAM resin composite inlays was acceptable in class II cavities subsequent to 2‐year evaluation.

Review on Polymer, Ceramic and Composite Materials for CAD/CAM Indirect Restorations in Dentistry—Application, Mechanical Characteristics and Comparison

“…The technology provides the opportunity to use new materials for prosthetic reconstruction and maintain the quality control of the process [18]. All these positive aspects of CAD/CAM technology are reflected in patients' satisfaction and long-term restoration success considering both ceramic [19,20] and composite restorations [21,22].…”

Clinical Evaluation of Resin Composite CAD/CAM Restorations Placed by Undergraduate Students

“…The clinical performance of Lava Ultimate restorations has previously been studied using either the USPHS [37] or FDI criteria [35,36,39,52]. The USPHS criteria used in this study do not fully comply with the modified set proposed by Fasbinder et al [37], who added extra subset scores for most of the criteria except for color match and anatomic form.…”

“…To the best of our knowledge, Zimmerman et al [39] did not use IDS and applied a dual cure adhesive from another brand rather than the restorative material (Variolink II, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Lichtenstein). Both Tunac et al [36] and Souza et al [35] used the 10-MDP containing Rely X Ultimate adhesive system (3M, St. Paul, MN, USA). Fasbinder et al [37] compared the abovementioned luting cements but did not find any significant difference over a 5-year follow-up period.…”

“…In a recent split-mouth study, Souza et al [35] reported a 100% clinical success rate of both lithium disilicate and Lava Ultimate onlays over a 1-year period. When comparing Lava Ultimate and direct composite resin restorations outcomes after 2 years of service, Tunac et al [36] confirmed a 100% retention rate and no significant differences between the materials in any of the clinical criteria. Fasbinder et al [37] re-ported a Kaplan-Meier probability for onlay fracture of 0.083 (CI 0.036; 0.189) after 5 years, which was not significantly different from leucite-reinforced ceramic.…”

“…Debonding and cohesive fractures have been reported by previous authors and have been linked to the material's resilience, leading to a revision of the clinical indications in 2015. Although Lava Ultimate has been used for over 7 years, independent studies evaluating the clinical performance are scarce [35][36][37][38][39]. Therefore, the purpose of this clinical trial is to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of resin composite intracoronal chairside CAD-CAM restorations up to 44 months using internationally accepted USPHS standards.…”