Abstract
Statement of problem. Several in vitro studies have been published showing the incapability of the chemical cure of dual-cured resin composite luting agents to compensate for absence of visible light activation. Purpose. This study evaluated and compared pairs of Empress ceramic inlays luted with 2 chemical-cured luting agents: a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a resin composite within individual patients. Material and methods. Seventy-nine ceramic inlays were placed in class II cavities in 29 patients. In each patient half of the inlays were luted with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and the other half with a chemical-cured resin composite cement. The inlays were evaluated clinically, according to modified USPHS criteria, at baseline, after 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. Results. No failed inlays were observed during the 2-year follow-up. A slight ditching of the cement margins was observed in both luting groups. No significant difference was seen between the 2 luting techniques. Conclusion. IPS Empress inlays luted with both chemical-cured luting agents functioned satisfactorily in the short-term follow-up. Longer observation periods are necessary to evaluate the long-term clinical behavior of both luting techniques. (J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:529-35.)
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
