Title: 0877 - Marginal Quality of Three Different Chairside Manufactured Restorations


Judith Kerstan (Presenter)
Witten/Herdecke University

Sven Schreiber, Witten/Herdecke University
Stefan Zimmer, Witten/Herdecke University
Mozhgan Bizhang, University Witten


Objectives: In this in vitro study different chairside manufactured restorations were evaluated regarding marginal quality after artificial aging.

Methods: Sixty class-2-cavities with two proximal boxes extending 1.5 mm below the cementoenamel junction were prepared in extracted human molars, which were randomly assigned to three groups: Group I indirect composite inlays (GrandioSO, VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany); group II CAD/CAM ceramic inlays (CEREC-3D, Sirona, Wals, Austria; IPS Empress CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein); group III direct composite restorations (GrandioSO, VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany). All restorations were bonded with Futurabond U (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany) and inlays were inserted with dual-curing resin cement (Bifix QM, VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany). The specimens were stored 21 days in saline, thereafter thermocycled (Thermocycler THE-1100, SD Mechatronik, Feldkirchen-Westerham, Deutschland) at 5 °C and 55 °C with 2000 cycles and placed in a chewing simulator (Kausimulator CS4.8, SD Mechatronik, Feldkirchen-Westerham, Deutschland) at 50 N load and 150.000 cycles. After thermocycling marginal qualities were evaluated using a SEM at a magnification of 200x regarding their gingivocervical margin integrity (proportion of gap free margins, irregularities, micro gaps, gaps > 2µm). Statistical analysis was performed with Kruskal-Wallis-Test and Mann-Whitney-U-Test (p < 0.05).

Results: After thermocycling and chewing simulation, the median (95% CI) of percentages of gap free margins was 93.11% (79.71 – 92.53) for indirect composite inlays, 79.48% (68.86 – 83.55) for CAD/CAM ceramic inlays, and 24.2% (19.46 – 30.99) for direct composite restorations. Pairwise comparisons revealed significant differences between the three groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, the results showed that indirect composite inlays may be a good alternative to CAD/CAM ceramic inlays or direct composite restorations. This study was supported by VOCO.

Student Presenter

Disclosure Statement:
The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: NONE