PURPOSE: To evaluate the 3-yr clinical performance of composite and ceramic inlays in posterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 47 composite inlays (Tetric, Blend-a-Lux, Pertac) and 24 ceramic inlays (Empress) were placed by seven student operators under supervision of an experienced dentist. Clinical assessment of 58 inlays (81.7%) was performed after 3 yrs using amodified USPHS criteria and statistically analyzed with Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 100% of the ceramic inlays and 89% of the composite inlays were assessed to be clinically excellent or acceptable. Three composite inlays failed during the first yr and one had to be replaced during the second evaluation period. All composite inlay failures were recorded on molars, revealing a significantly higher failure rate compared with premolars (Fisher's test, P = 0.041). Ceramic inlays revealed a significantly better "anatomic form of the surface" (P = 0.027) and "integrity of the restoration" (P = 0.035). Inlays in small cavities performed better for "marginal integrity" (P = 0.033) and "discoloration at the margin" (P = 0.038).
PURPOSE: To evaluate the 3-yr clinical performance of composite and ceramic inlays in posterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 47 composite inlays (Tetric, Blend-a-Lux, Pertac) and 24 ceramic inlays (Empress) were placed by seven student operators under supervision of an experienced dentist. Clinical assessment of 58 inlays (81.7%) was performed after 3 yrs using amodified USPHS criteria and statistically analyzed with Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 100% of the ceramic inlays and 89% of the composite inlays were assessed to be clinically excellent or acceptable. Three composite inlays failed during the first yr and one had to be replaced during the second evaluation period. All composite inlay failures were recorded on molars, revealing a significantly higher failure rate compared with premolars (Fisher's test, P = 0.041). Ceramic inlays revealed a significantly better "anatomic form of the surface" (P = 0.027) and "integrity of the restoration" (P = 0.035). Inlays in small cavities performed better for "marginal integrity" (P = 0.033) and "discoloration at the margin" (P = 0.038).
Authors: René Daher; Stefano Ardu; Enrico Di Bella; Giovanni T Rocca; Albert J Feilzer; Ivo Krejci Journal: Odontology Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 2.634