Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of two types of ceramics: a slurry-powder ceramic (Duceram Plus, Degussa) - D and a hot-pressed leucite-based glass-ceramic (IPS Empress, Ivoclar Vivadent) - IPS. Eighty-six restorations, 44 IPS and 42 D, were made by one operator. A total of 33 onlays and 53 inlays on twenty-seven premolars and 59 molars were cemented in 35 patients of both sexes, mean age 35 years. All restorations were cemented with the dual-resin cement (Variolink, Ivoclar-Vivadent) under rubber dam and were evaluated at the baseline and after six months, using the modified U.S.P.H.S. criteria for postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, fracture, color match, marginal discoloration, marginal integrity and surface texture. Additionally radiographs and intraoral photographs were carried out. At baseline 86 restorations were analyzed and all of them received Alfa rating, except for the following that received Bravo rating for postoperative sensitivity - IPS (2.27%); D (7.14%); for color match - IPS (2.27%); D (2.38%) and for surface texture - IPS (2.27%); D (11.90%). After 6 months 100% of the restorations were analyzed and the following received Bravo rating: color match - IPS (4.55%) and D (9.52%); surface texture - IPS (2.27%) and D (11.9%); marginal discoloration - IPS (6.82%) and D (4.76%) and marginal integrity - IPS (4.55%) and D (7.14%). The results were submitted to the Fisher and McNemar Statistical Tests. No significant differences were noticed between the two ceramics. Both ceramics demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance after six months.
Highlights
In recent years, patients have developed increasing interest in tooth-colored nonmetallic restorations, influenced by media publicity, as well as uncertainty regarding the toxicity of mercury-containing amalgams[3]
The IPS Empress is basically a feldspathic ceramic delivered in cylindrical ingots, in which the leucite crystals are already present in the ceramic ingots, due to preceraming during fabrication[9,22]
The Fisher statistical test revealed no significant difference between Duceram and IPS Empress ceramic systems for all aspects evaluated (p > 0.05)
Summary
Patients have developed increasing interest in tooth-colored nonmetallic restorations, influenced by media publicity, as well as uncertainty regarding the toxicity of mercury-containing amalgams[3]. Several esthetic materials are available in the market, including glass ionomer cements, hybrid ionomers, resin composites and ceramics. In the last few years, many types of all-ceramic materials, with high values of compressive strength, have been developed and improved adhesive techniques have enabled their use in many clinical situations[19]. Among these materials, a hot-pressed leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic, the IPS Empress system (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Leichtenstein), has been designed for the fabrication of tooth-colored inlays, onlays and full crowns[16,28]. Et al.[21] (1998) and Chai, et al.[4] (2000) compared the in vitro fracture resistance of some all-ceramic systems cemented with an adhesive technique and reported no statistically significant differences between IPS Empress, In-Ceram and Procera systems
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
