Abstract
Aim: To assess the fracture resistance of Premolars restored with inlay and onlay composite and E-max CAD/CAM block restoration.
 Material and method: Randomly, fifty maxillary premolar teeth were separated into three major groups: The first group was left unaltered (control group), while the other two groups were prepared with inlay and onlay cavities and restored with lithium disilicate blocks (IPS E.max CAD) and ceramic blocks (Cerasmart). Restorations were bonded using adhesive resin cement (RelyX Ultimate). All samples were thermocycling 500 cycles, between 5 to 55°C, and the cycle time was set at the 30s. The specimen was undergone compressive axial loading in a universal testing machine till the fracture occurred. The result was analyzed using one-way ANOVA, and LSD tests with a significance level set at 0.05.
 Result: There were no significant differences in means between the control group and the inlay groups that were restored with Emax and Cerasmart (P >.05).but, the control group has significantly higher means than onlay groups restored with Emax and Cerasmart (P< .05). The two materials show comparable results in both designs.
 Conclusion: The fracture resistance of inlay-prepared teeth showed comparable strength to the intact teeth. Conversely, the fracture resistance of onlay-prepared teeth is comparatively lower than intact teeth. The two materials show comparable results irrespective of cavity design.
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.
