Marginal adaptation, @entity174 load and macroscopic failure mode of adhesively luted PMMA-based CAD/ XXXX inlays.

@entity1 @entity174 @entity5380 @entity14688 @entity5467
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate marginal adaptation, @entity174 load and failure types of CAD/ @entity5380 polymeric inlays. METHODS: Standardized prepared @entity1 molars (48) were divided into four groups (n=12): (A) PCG (positive control group); adhesively luted glass-ceramic inlays, (B) @entity14688 ; CAD/ @entity5380 polymeric inlays luted using a self-adhesive resin cement, (C) @entity5467 ; CAD/ @entity5380 polymeric inlays luted using a conventional resin cement, and (D) NCG (negative control group); direct-filled resin-based composite restorations. All specimens were subjected to a chewing simulator. Before and after chewing fatigue, marginal adaptation was assessed at two interfaces: (1) between dental hard tissues and luting cement and (2) between luting cement and restoration. Thereafter, the specimens were loaded and the @entity174 loads, as well as the failure types, were determined. The data were analysed using three- and one-way ANOVA with post hoc Scheff   test, two sample Student's t-test (p<0.05). RESULTS: Before and after chewing fatigue, marginal adaptation for interface 1 showed significantly better results for @entity14688 and PCG than for @entity5467 (p=0.001-0.02) and NCG (p=0.001-0.047). For interface 2, marginal adaptation for @entity5467 was significantly inferior to @entity14688 (p<0.001) and PCG (p<0.001). Chewing fatigue had a negative impact on the marginal adaptation of @entity5467 and NCG. No significant differences in @entity174 load were found between all tested groups. SIGNIFICANCE: Self-adhesive luted polymeric CAD/ @entity5380 inlays showed similar marginal adaptation and @entity174 load values compared to adhesively luted glass-ceramic inlays.
