Clinical evaluation of indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays over a 24-month period.

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of ceramic and indirect resin composite onlays over a 24-month period. A total of 94 onlay restorations in 47 patients were included in this study. Cavities were prepared, full-arch impressions were taken, and onlays were fabricated in the laboratory. All restorations were placed with a dual-cured luting resin composite system. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Differences between Alpha scores were analyzed statistically. The recall rate of this study was 93.6%. At the six-month evaluation, one onlay failed due to pulpitis. Other than the color match, there was no significant difference between indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays (p > 0.05). For indirect resin composites, Alpha score differences pertaining to color match, marginal adaptation, and surface texture were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05) between the baseline and the 24-month recall. For ceramic restorations, marginal adaptation criteria was the only significant difference over the 24-month period (p < 0.05). At the end of 24 months, both indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays were considered to be successful clinically.