The marginal quality of luted ceramic inserts in bovine teeth and ceramic inlays in extracted molars after occlusal loading

Journal of Adhesive Dentistry

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 213-223

  Heintze, Siegward D ^a,d   Cavalleri, Andrea ^b   Rousson, Valentin ^c  

^a Ivoclar Vivadent   (Liechtenstein)

^b Research and Development   (Liechtenstein)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d NONE   (Liechtenstein)

Author keywords

Ceramic inlay; Ceramic insert; Luting cements; Marginal adaptation; Sample size; SEM

Indexed keywords

TOOTH CEMENT;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CATTLE; CERAMICS; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; EVALUATION; HUMAN; MOLAR TOOTH; SAMPLE SIZE; WEIGHT BEARING;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; CATTLE; CERAMICS; DENTAL CEMENTS; HUMANS; INLAYS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MOLAR; SAMPLE SIZE; WEIGHT-BEARING;

EID: 26444453230     PISSN: 14615185     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abdalla AI, Davidson CL. Marginal integrity after fatigue loading of ceramic inlay restorations luted with three different cements. Am J Dent 2000;13:77-80.
2. Ben-Amar A, Cardash HS. The fluid-filled gap under amalgam and resin composite restorations. Am J Dent 1991;4:226-230.
3. Berg NG, Derand T. A 5-year evaluation of ceramic inlays (CEREC). Swed Dent J 1997;21:121-127.
4. Bergenholtz G, Cox CF, Loesche WJ, Syed SA. Bacterial leakage around dental restorations: its effect on the dental pulp. J Oral Pathol 1982;11:439-450.
5. Bergman MA. The clinical performance of ceramic inlays: a review. Aust Dent J 1999;44:157-168.
6. Brännström M. Etiology of dentin hypersensitivity. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1992;88(suppl 1):7-13.
7. Browning WD, Dennison JB. A survey of failure modes in composite resin restoration. Oper Dent 1996;21:160-166.
8. Cagidiaco MC, Ferrari M. Bonding to dentin. Livorno: Casa Editrice O. Debatte & F, 1995.
9. Chadwick B, Dummer P, Dunstan F. A systematic review of the longevity of dental restorations. York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, 1999.
10. Clotten S, Blunck U, Roulet JF. The influence of a simplified application technique for ceramic inlays on the margin quality. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:159-166.
11. CRA. Posterior full crowns 2001, Part 2: Resin crowns, 4 year clinical status. CRA Newsletter 2001;25:1-3.
12. de Almeida JB, Platt JA, Oshida Y, Moore BK, Cochran MA, Eckert GJ. Three different methods to evaluate microleakage of packable composites in Class II restorations. Oper Dent 2003;28:453-460.
13. Dietschi D, Moor L. Evaluation of the marginal and internal adaptation of different ceramic and composite inlay systems after an in vitro fatigue test. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:41-56.
14. El-Mowafy O, Brochu JF. Longevity and clinical performance of IPS-Empress ceramic restorations-a literature review. J Can Dent Assoc 2002;68:233-237.
15. Fernandes CR Chevitarese O. The orientation and direction of rods in dental enamel. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:793-800.
16. Ferrari M, Dagostin A, Fabianelli A. Marginal integrity of ceramic inlays luted with a self-curing resin system. Dent Mater 2003;19:270-276.
17. Frankenberger R, Petschelt A, Krämer N. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after six years: clinical behavior. Oper Dent 2000;25:459-465.
18. Frankenberger R, Sindel J, Krämer N, Petschelt A. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaptation: direct composite resins vs ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 1999;24:147-155.
19. Göhring TN, Peters OA, Lutz F. Marginal adaptation of inlay-retained adhesive fixed partial dentures after mechanical and thermal stress: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:81-92.
20. Going RE. Microleakage around dental restorations: a summarizing review. J Am Dent Assoc 1972;84:1349-1357.
21. Hahn P, Schaller HG, Mullner U, Hellwig E. Marginal leakage in class II-restorations after use of ceramic-inserts luted with different materials. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:567-574.
22. Haller B, Hassner K, Moll K. Marginal adaptation of dentin bonded ceramic inlays: effects of bonding systems and luting resin composites. Oper Dent 2003;28:574-584.
23. Hayashi M, Tsuchitani Y, Kawamura Y, Miura M, Takeshige F, Ebisu S. Eight-year clinical evaluation of fired ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 2000;25:473-481.
24. Heintze SD, Twetman S. Interdental mutans streptococci suppression in vivo: a comparison of different chlorhexidine regimens in relation to restorative material. Am J Dent 2002;15:103-108.
25. Henisch G. Ein computergestütztes System zur Erfassung und Verwaltung von Messdaten im Rahmen der quantitativen Randanalyse am Rasterelektronenmikroskop. Free University Berlin: 1989.
26. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:45-64.
27. Hofmann N, Haller B, Klaiber B, Münchenberg K. Randqualität gesinterter und gepresster Keramikinlays nach Belastung im Kausimulator. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1993;48:713-716.
28. Kersten S, Lutz F, Besek M. Zahnfarbene adhäsive Füllungen im Seitenzahnbereich. Zürich: Eigenverlag PPK, 2001.
29. Kidd EA, Beighton D. Prediction of secondary caries around tooth-colored restorations: a clinical and microbiological study. J Dent Res 1996;75:1942-1946.
30. Krämer N, Frankenberger R. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays after six years: wear of luting composites. Oper Dent 2000;25:466-472.
31. Krämer N, Lohbauer U, Frankenberger R. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations. Am J Dent 2000;13:60D-76D.
32. Krasse B. Prediction and prevention of recurrent caries based on microbiological assays. In: KJ Anusavice (ed). Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago: Quintessence, 1989:199-208.
33. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M. Marginal adaptation and fit of adhesive ceramic inlays. J Dent 1993;21:39-46.
34. Krejci I, Reich T, Lutz F, Albertoni M. In-vitro-Testverfahren zur Evaluation dentaler Restaurationssysteme. 1. Computergesteuerter Kausimulator. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 1990;100:953-960.
35. Kunzelmann K-H. Verschleissanalyse und -quantifizierung von Füllungs-materialien in vivo und in vitro. Aachen: Shaker Verlag, 1998.
36. Lang R, Rosentritt M, Behr M, Handel G. Randspaltverhalten von Keramikinlays bei Verwendung von modifizierten Glasionomer-, Kompomer- und Kompositzementen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 2000;55:540-543.
37. Lutz F, Krejci I. Mesio-occlusodistal amalgam restorations: quantitative in vivo data up to 4 years. A data base for the development of amalgam substitutes. Quintessence Int 1994;25:185-190.
38. Manhart J, Schmidt M, Chen HY, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R. Marginal quality of tooth-colored restorations in class II cavities after artificial aging. Oper Dent 2001;26:357-366.
39. Mjör IA. The location of clinically diagnosed secondary caries. Quintessence Int 1998;5:313-317.
40. Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE. Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice. Int Dent J 2000;50:361-366.
41. Mjör IA, Toffenetti F. Secondary caries: a literature review with case reports. Quintessence Int 2000;31:165-179.
42. Noack MJ, Van Meerbeek B, Roulet JF, Lambrechts P. Marginal behavior of 10 different tooth-colored inlay systems in vivo [abstract 1227]. J Dent Res 1995;74:165.
43. Opdam NJ, Feilzer AJ, Roeters JJ, Smale I. Class I occlusal composite resin restorations: in vivo post-operative sensitivity, wall adaptation, and microleakage. Am J Dent 1998;11:229-234.
44. Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, Feilzer AJ, Verdonschot EH. Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in Class 2 resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent 1998;26:555-562.
45. Özcan M, Vallittu PK. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of luting cement to ceramics. Dent Mater 2003;19:725-731.
46. Rathke A, Heintze SD. Prospective clinical trial on a posterior composite with a one-bottle adhesive [abstract 114]. J Dent Res 2001;80:1282.
47. Reis AF, Giannini M, Kavaguchi A, Soares CJ, Line SR. Comparison of microtensile bond strength to enamel and dentin of human, bovine, and porcine teeth. J Adhes Dent 2004;6:117-121.
48. Reiss B, Walther W. Clinical long-term results and 10-year Kaplan-Meier analysis of Cerec restorations. Int J Comput Dent 2000;3:9-23.
49. Roulet JF, Reich T, Blunck U, Noack M. Quantitative margin analysis in the scanning electron microscope. Scanning Microsc 1989;3:147-158.
50. Schilke R, Lisson JA, Bauss O, Geurtsen W. Comparison of the number and diameter of dentinal tubules in human and bovine dentine by scanning electron microscopic investigation. Arch Oral Biol 2000;45:355-361.
51. Schuurs AH, Wu MK, Wesselink PR, Duivenvoorden HJ. Endodontic leakage studies reconsidered. Part II. Statistical aspects. Int Endod J 1993;26:44-52.
52. Stoll R, Remes H, Kunzelmann KH, Stachniss V. Marginal characteristics of different filling materials and filling methods with standardized cavity preparation. J Adhes Dent 2000;2:129-138.
53. Thonemann B, Federlin M, Schmalz G, Hiller KA. Resin-modified glass ionomers for luting posterior ceramic restorations. Dent Mater 1995;11:161-168.
54. van Dijken JW. Resin-modified glass ionomer cement and self-cured resin composite luted ceramic inlays. A 5-year clinical evaluation. Dent Mater 2003;19:670-674.
55. van Dijken JW, Horstedt P. Marginal breakdown of fired ceramic inlays cemented with glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement or resin composite. J Dent 1994;22:265-272.