The clinical performance of ceramic inlays: A review

Australian Dental Journal

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 157-168

  Bergman, Mark A ^a  

^a NONE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Ceramic inlays; Clinical performance; Literature review

Indexed keywords

TOOTH CEMENT;

CERAMICS; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL SURGERY; HUMAN; REVIEW; STANDARD; TOOTH DISEASE;

CERAMICS; CLINICAL TRIALS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CEMENTS; DENTAL LEAKAGE; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; HUMANS; INLAYS;

EID: 0033193685     PISSN: 00450421     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1999.tb00217.x     Document Type: Review

References (129)

1. Banks RG. Conservative posterior ceramic restorations: A literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:619-626.
2. Qualtrough AJE, Wilson NHF, Smith GA. The porcelain inlay: A historical view. Oper Dent 1990;15:61-70.
3. Kelly JR, Nishimura I, Campbell SD. Ceramics in dentistry: Historical roots and current perspectives. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:18-32.
4. Ironside JG. Alternatives to amalgam - the role of bonded porcelain. N Z Dent J 1991;87:46-48.
5. Bergman M. Side-effects of amalgam and its alternatives: local, systemic and environmental. Int Dent J 1990;40:4-10.
6. Christensen GJ. Tooth-colored inlays and onlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;117:Spec Iss:12E-17E.
7. Noack MJ, Roulet J-F. Tooth-colored inlays. Curr Opin Dent 1991;1:172-178.
8. Tyas MJ. Dental amalgam - what are the alternatives? Int Dent J 1994;44:303-308.
9. Rykke M. Dental materials for posterior restorations. Endod Dent Traumatol 1992;8:139-148.
10. Baumann MA, Heidemann D. Biocompatibility of dental inlay ceramics. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:373-376.
11. Rosenblum MA, Schulman A. A review of all-ceramic restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1997;128:297-307.
12. Milleding P, Örtengren U, Karlsson S. Ceramic inlay systems: some clinical aspects. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22:571-580.
13. Thordrup M, Isidor F, Hörsted-Bindslev P. A one-year clinical study of indirect and direct composite and ceramic inlays. Scand J Dent Res 1994;102:186-192.
14. Kerschbaum T. Quality assurance in CEREC restorations. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:321-333.
15. Jokstad A, Mjör IA, Frazier KB. The teaching of all-ceramic restorations in Scandinavian dental schools: A survey. Acta Odontol Scand 1996;54:200-204.
16. Wilson NHF, Qualtrough AJE, Mjör IA. All-ceramic restorations: Teaching in UK and Irish dental schools. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 1996;4:15-19.
17. Frazier KB, Mjör IA. The teaching of all-ceramic restorations in North American dental schools: Materials and techniques employed, J Esthet Dent 1997;9:86-93.
18. Kawai K, Hayashi M, Torii M, Tsuchitani Y. Marginal adaptability and fit of ceramic milled inlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:1414-1419.
19. Kawai K, Isenberg KF, Leinfelder KF. Effect of gap dimension on composite resin cement wear. Quintessence Int 1994;25:53-58.
20. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M. Marginal adaptation and fit of adhesive ceramic inlays. J Dent 1993;21:39-46.
21. Molin M, Karlsson S. The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems: A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:201-206.
22. O'Neal SJ, Miracle RL, Leinfelder KF. Evaluating interfacial gaps for esthetic inlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1993;124:48-54.
23. Siervo S, Pampalone A, Siervo P, Siervo R. Where is the gap? Machinable ceramic systems and conventional laboratory restorations at a glance. Quintessence Int 1994;25:773-779.
24. Sjögren G. Marginal and internal fit of four different types of ceramic inlays after luting: An in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1995;53:24-28.
25. Sorenson JA, Munksgaard EC. Relative gap formation of resin-cemented ceramic inlays and dentin bonding agents. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:374-378.
26. Sorenson JA, Munksgaard EC. Relative gap formation adjacent to ceramic inlays with combinations of resin cements and dentin bonding agents. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:472-476.
27. Thordrup M, Isidor F, Hörsted-Bindslev P. Comparison of marginal fit and microleakage of ceramic and composite inlays: an in vitro study. J Dent 1994;22:147-153.
28. Sturdevant JR, Heymann HO, Wilder AD, Roberson TM, Bayne SC. Composite cement thickness of CEREC CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 1991;70:296:Abstr 245.
29. Brandestini M, Mörmann WH, Lutz F, Krejci I. Computer machined ceramic inlays: In vitro marginal adaptation. J Dent Res 1985;64:208:Abstr 305.
30. Geppert W, Roulet J-F, Berlin FU. In vitro marginal integrity of MOD Dicor inlays luted with adhesive techniques. J Dent Res 1986;65:731:Abstr 48.
31. Heinzmann J-L, Krejci I, Lutz F. Wear and marginal adaptation of glass-ceramic inlays, amalgam, and enamel. J Dent Res 1990;69:161:Abstr 423.
32. Peters A, Bieniek KW. SEM-examination of the marginal adaptation of computer machined ceramic restorations. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:365-371.
33. Mörmann WH, Schug J. Grinding precision and accuracy of fit of CEREC 2 CAD-CIM inlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1997;128:47-53.
34. Karaagaclioglu L, Zaimoglu A, Akoren AC. Microleakage of indirect inlays placed on different kinds of glass ionomer cement linings. J Oral Rehabil 1992;19:457-469.
35. LoPresti JT, David S, Calamia JR. Microleakage of CAD-CAM porcelain restorations. Am J Dent 1996;9:37-39.
36. Sorensen JA, Kang SK, Avera SP. Porcelain-composite interface microleakage with various porcelain surface treatments. Dent Mater 1991;7:118-123.
37. Isenberg BP, Essig ME, Beaudreau RW, Teixeira LC. Microleakage evaluation of Cerec CAD/CAM inlays. J Dent Res 1993;72:114:Abstr 91.
38. Lacy AM, Zhang K, Koh A, Wiltshire WA, Watanabe L. Marginal microleakage around Cl II resin and Dicor inlays. J Dent Res 1990;196:Abstr 669.
39. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer J-M, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int 1990;21:823-831.
40. Bergmann P, Noack MJ, Roulet J-F. Marginal adaptation with glass-ceramic inlays adhesively luted with glycerine gel. Quintessence Int 1991;22:739-744.
41. Dérand T. Stress analysis of cemented or resin-bonded loaded porcelain inlays. Dent Mater 1991;7:21-24.
42. Jacobsen PH, Rees JS. Luting agents for ceramic and polymeric inlays and onlays. Int Dent J 1992;42:145-149.
43. Peutzfeldt A. Dual-cure resin cements: in vitro wear and effect of quantity of remaining double bonds, filler volume, and light curing. Acta Odontol Scand 1995;53:29-34.
44. Noack MJ, Locke LS, Roulet J-F. Marginal adaptation of porcelain inlays luted with different composite materials. J Dent Res 1990;69:161:Abstr 421.
45. Zuellig R, Bryant R. Two year evaluation of Cerec restorations: Influence of luting agent. J Dent Res 1995;74:405:Abstr 34.
46. DeLong R, Sasik C, Pintado MR, Douglas WH. The wear of enamel when opposed by ceramic systems. Dent Mater 1989;5:266-271.
47. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M. Wear of CAD/CAM ceramic inlays: Restorations, opposing cusps, and luting cements. Quintessence Int 1994;25:199-207.
48. Krejci I. Wear of Cerec and other restorative materials. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:245-251.
49. Frazier KB, Sarrett DC. Wear resistance of dual-cured resin luting agents. Am J Dent 1995;8:161-164.
50. Ujigo Y, Torii Y, Inoue K. Filler content versus wear of resin cement around CAD/CAM inlays. J Dent Res 1994;73:325:Abstr 1787.
51. Peutzfeldt A. Effect of the ultrasonic insertion technique on the seating of composite inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52:51-54.
52. Noack MJ, Roulet J-F, Bergmann P. A new method to lute tooth colored inlays with highly filled composite resins. J Dent Res 1991;70:457:Abstr 1528.
53. Sjögren G, Johansson K. Charges extracted from dental ceramics: An indication of piezoelectric activity? Acta Odontol Scand 1996;54:205-210.
54. Sjögren G, Bergman M, Johansson K. Piezoelectricity in dental materials, a conceivable cause of postrestorative sensitivity. Acta Odontol Scand 1992;50:313-319.
55. EI-Mowafy OM, Brown JW, McComb D. Radiopacity of direct ceramic inlay restoratives. J Dent Res 1991;70:296:Abstr 248.
56. Lambrechts P, Inokoshi S, Van Meerbeek B, Willems G, Braem M, Vanherle G. Classification and potential of composite luting materials. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:61-90.
57. Magne P, Dietschi D, Holz J. Esthetic restorations for posterior teeth: Practical and clinical considerations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1996;16:105-119.
58. Piddock V, Qualtrough AJE. Dental ceramics - an update. J Dent 1990;18:227-235.
59. Sjögren G, Bergman M, Molin M, Bessing C. A clinical examination of ceramic (Cerec) inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 1992;50:171-178.
60. Seghi RR, Denry IL, Rosenstiel SF. Relative fracture toughness and hardness of new dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:145-150.
61. Anusavice KJ. Dental ceramics. In: Anusavice KJ, ed. Phillips' science of dental materials. 10th edn. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1996:583-618.
62. Nathanson D. Principles of porcelain use as an inlay/onlay material. In: Garber DA, Goldstein RE, eds. Porcelain & composite inlays & onlays: Esthetic posterior restorations. Chicago: Quintessence, 1994:32-37.
63. Fett HP, Mörmann WH, Krejci I, Lutz F. The effects of short bevels and silanization on marginal adaptation of computer-machined mesio-occlusodistal inlays. Quintessence Int 1991;22:823-829.
64. Lu R, Harcourt JK, Tyas MJ, Alexander B. An investigation of the composite resin/porcelain interface. Aust Dent J 1992;37:12-19.
65. Roulet J-F, Soderholm K-JM. Variables influencing the bond strength of ceramic-resin interfaces. J Dent Res 1991;70:434:Abstr 1348.
66. Nathanson D. Factors in optimizing the strength of bonded ceramic restorations. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:51-59.
67. Aberg C, van Dijken JWV, Olofsson A-L. Three-year comparison of fired ceramic inlays cemented with composite resin or glass ionomer cement. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52:140-149.
68. Mörmann WH, Krejci I. Computer-designed inlays after 5 years in situ: clinical performance and scanning electron microscopic evaluation. Quintessence Int 1992;23:109-115.
69. Mörmann WH, Krejci I. Clinical and SEM evaluation of Cerec inlays after 5 years in situ. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:25-32.
70. Krejci I, Krejci D, Lutz F. Clinical evaluation of a new pressed glass ceramic inlay material over 1.5 years. Quintessence Int 1992;23:181-186.
71. Friedl K-H, Schmaltz G, Hiller K-A, Sailer A. In-vivo evaluation of a feldspathic ceramic system: 2-year results. J Dent 1996;24:25-31.
72. Thonemann B, Federlin M, Schmalz G, Schams A. Clinical evaluation of heat-pressed glass-ceramic inlays in vivo: 2-year results. Clin Oral Invest 1997;1:27-34.
73. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, et al. Clinical and semi-quantitative marginal analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years. J Dent 1995;23:329-338.
74. Qualtrough AJE, Wilson NHF, Smith GA. An evaluation of the use of porcelain inlays in premolar and permanent molar teeth. J Dent Res 1988;67:674:Abstr 275.
75. Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Willems G, et al. Marginal adaptation of four tooth-coloured inlay systems in vivo. J Dent 1992;20:18-26.
76. Isidor F, Brøndum K. A clinical evaluation of porcelain inlays. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:140-144.
77. Walther W, Reiss B. Six year survival analysis of Cerec restorations in a private practice. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:199-204.
78. Noack MJ, Roulet J-F. Survival rates and mode of failure of Dicor inlays after 4 years. J Dent Res 1994;73:196:Abstr 759.
79. Haas M, Arnetzl G, Peril C, Polansky R, Smetan M. CEREC vs laboratory inlays. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:299-312.
80. Mjör IA, Jokstad A, Qvist V. Longevity of posterior restorations. Int Dent J 1990;40:11-17.
81. Stenberg R, Matsson L. Clinical evaluation of glass ceramic inlays (Dicor). Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:91-97.
82. Qualtrough AJE, Wilson NHF. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a porcelain inlay system. J Dent 1996;24:317-323.
83. Mörmann WH, Götsch T, Krejci I, Lutz F, Barbakow F. Clinical status of 94 Cerec ceramic inlays after 3 years in situ. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:355-363.
84. Höglund C, van Dijken J, Olofsson A-L. A clinical evaluation of adhesively luted ceramic inlays - A two year follow-up study. Swed Dent J 1992;16:169-171.
85. Tidehag P, Gunne J. A 2-year clinical follow-up study of IPS Empress ceramic inlays. Int J Prosthodont 1995;8:456-460.
86. Qualtrough AJE, Wilson NHF, Smith GA. An assessment of a porcelain inlay system - Initial findings. J Dent Res 1989;68:960:Abstr 749.
87. Molin M, Karlsson S. A 3-year clinical follow-up study of a ceramic (Optec) inlay system. Acta Odontol Scand 1996;54:145-149.
88. Bieniek KW, Peters A. Clinical evaluation of ceramic restorations machined by a CAD/CAM technique. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:327-335.
89. Wat P, Cheung GSP. Incidence of post-operative sensitivity following indirect porcelain onlay restorations: Preliminary results. Asian J Aesthet Dent 1995;3:3-7.
90. Heymann HO, Wilder AD, Sturdevant JR, Roberson TM, Bayne SC. 2-year clinical performance of Cerec CAD/CAM-generated MGC Inlays. J Dent Res 1992;71:207:Abstr 814.
91. Heymann HO, Bayne SC, Sturdevant JR, Wilder AD Jr, Roberson TM. The clinical performance of CAD-CAM generated ceramic inlays - a four-year study. J Am Dent Assoc 1996;127:1171-1181.
92. Haller B, Hofmann N. Postrestorative sensitivity: Mechanisms and prevention. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:127-139.
93. Felton DA, Bergenholtz G, Kanoy BE. Evaluation of the desensitizing effect of Gluma Dentin Bond on teeth prepared for complete-coverage restorations. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4:292-298.
94. Taleghani M, Leinfelder KF. Two-year clinical evaluation of direct porcelain bonded inlays. J Dent Res 1989;68:249:Abstr 546.
95. Christensen GJ, Brown TA, Babb R. Accuracy of fit of direct-firing porcelain inlays. J Prosthet Dent 1969;22:46-53.
96. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Holz J. In vitro evaluation of marginal fit and morphology of fired ceramic inlays. Quintessence Int 1992;23:271-278.
97. Sewitch T. Resin-bonded metal-ceramic inlays: A new approach. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:408-411.
98. Thordrup M, Isidor F, Horsted-Bindslev P. Cerec or laboratory ceramic inlay? In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:91-101.
99. Hickel R, Dasch W, Mehl A, Kremers L. CAD/CAM - Fillings of the future? Im Dent J 1997;47:247-258.
100. Shearer AC, Heymann HO, Wilson NHF. Two ceramic materials compared for the production of CEREC inlays. J Dent 1993;21:302-304.
101. Inokoshi S, Van Meerbeek B, Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Marginal accuracy of CAD/CAM inlays made with the original and the updated software. J Dent 1992;20:171-177.
102. Pallesen U. Clinical evaluation of CAD/CAM ceramic restorations: 6-year report. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:241-253.
103. Kanzler R, Roulet J-F. Margin quality and longevity in vivo of sintered ceramic inlays luted with adhesive techniques. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Ibid:537-552.
104. Kanzler R, Roulet J-F. Margin quality and longevity in vivo of sintered ceramic inlays luted with adhesive techniques. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Ibid:537-552.
105. Roulet J-F, Kanzler R. Longevity and margin quality of adhesively luted sintered ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 1996;75:147:Abstr 1037.
106. Shortall AC, Baylis RL, Baylis MA, Grundy JR. Marginal seal comparisons between resin-bonded Class II porcelain inlays, posterior composite restorations, and direct composite resin inlays. Int J Prosthodont 1989;2:217-223.
107. Roulet J-F, Noack MJ. Tooth colored conventional and Cerec restorations - Claim and reality. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:233-243.
108. Hannig M, Schmeiser R. Esthetic posterior restorations utilizing the double inlay technique: A novel approach in esthetic dentistry. Quintessence Int 1997;28:79-83.
109. Anusavice KJ. Dental cements for bonding applications. In: Anusavice KJ, ed. Phillips' science of dental materials. 10th edn. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1996:581.
110. Isenberg BP, Essig ME, Leinfelder KF. Clinical evaluation of marginal integrity: two year results. In: Mörrnann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:163-172.
111. Essig ME, Isenberg BP, Leinfelder KF, Mueninghoff LA. An in-vivo evaluation of duo-cured cements with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 1991;70:296:Abstr 244.
112. Dahl BJ, Øilo G. In vivo wear ranking of some restorative materials. Quintessence Int 1994;25:561-565.
113. Christensen R, Christensen G, Vogl S, Bangerter V. 2 year clinical comparison of 6 inlay systems. J Dent Res 1991;70:561:Abstr 2360.
114. Jensen ME. A two-year clinical study of posterior etched-porcelain resin-bonded restorations. Am J Dent 1988;1:27-33.
115. Bessing C, Molin M. An in vivo study of glass ceramic (Dicor) inlays. Preliminary report. Acta Odontol Scand 1990;48:351-357.
116. Molin M, Karlsson S. A clinical evaluation of the Optec inlay system. Acta Odontol Scand 1992;50:227-233.
117. Fradeani M, Aquilano A, Bassein L. Longitudinal study of pressed glass-ceramic inlays for four and a half years. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:346-353.
118. Hars E. CEREC in X-ray. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:653-657.
119. Taleghani M, Leinfelder KF, Lane J. Posterior porcelain bonded inlays. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1987;8:410-418.
120. Garber DA, Goldstein RE. Tooth preparation. In: Garber DA, Goldstein RE, eds. Porcelain & composite inlays & onlays: Esthetic posterior restorations. Chicago: Quintessence, 1994:38-55.
121. Karapetian VE, Sorg T, Jöckel V, Baumann MA. Comparison of different polishing systems for dental inlay ceramics. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:553-559.
122. Haywood VB, Heymann HO, Scurria MS. Effects of water, speed, and experimental instrumentation on finishing and polishing porcelain intra-orally. Dent Mater 1989:5:185-188.
123. Stoll R, Seitner T, Schulte A, Stachniss V. The use of polishing systems on the surface of different ceramic materials In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:589-597.
124. Huerzeler MB, Fett H, Mörmann W. Marginal adaptation of Cerec-CAD-CAM inlays after 3.5 years. In: Mörmann WH, ed. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the Cerec Method. Berlin: Quintessence Verlag, 1991:417-423.
125. Brauner AW, Bieniek KW. Seven years of clinical experience with the CEREC inlay system. In: Mörmann WH, ed. CAD/CIM in aesthetic dentistry. CEREC 10 Year Anniversary Symposium. Berlin: Quintessence, 1996:217-228.
126. Berg NG, Dérand T. A 5-year evaluation of ceramic inlays (Cerec). Swed Dent J 1997;21:121-127.
127. Studer S, Lehner C, Scharer P. Glass-ceramic inlays and onlays made by IPS-Empress: First clinical results. J Dent Res 1992;71:658:Abstr 1144.
128. Roulet J-F. Longevity of glass ceramic inlays and amalgam -results up to 6 years. Clin Oral Invest 1997;1:40-46.
129. Goetsch T, Mörmann W, Krejci I, Lutz F. Cerec ceramic inlays clinically assessed using modified USPHS criteria. J Dent Res 1990;69:162:Abstr 425.