Marginal adaptation of heat-pressed glass-ceramic veneers to Class 3 composite restorations in vitro.
The aim of the present in vitro study was to compare the marginal adaptation and integrity of heat-pressed glass-ceramic veneers to adjacent class 3 composite restorations and to enamel using four dual-curing composite resin cements of different viscosity with their corresponding dentin bonding agents. Thirty-six caries-free human maxillary incisors were first restored with mesial and distal class 3 composite restorations and then prepared for facial ceramic veneers. The cavity margins of the veneers were located either in the class 3 composite restorations or in the residual enamel. Heat-pressed glass-ceramic veneers (IPS Empress) were inserted adhesively using one of the following four luting systems in nine teeth: SonoCem (SC) with EBS; Variolink Ultra (VU), Variolink High-Viscosity (VHV), and Variolink Low-Viscosity (VLV) with Syntac. The veneer margins in the region of the composite restoration and in the region apical to the composite restoration (ceramic/composite resin cement interfaces, composite resin cement/composite restoration interface, and composite resin cement/enamel interface) were evaluated before and after thermo-cycling and mechanical loading (TCML) by quantitative margin analysis under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) using an image analysis system. Furthermore, microleakage was assessed in each tooth by dye penetration after TCML. For all luting systems, SEM analysis revealed excellent marginal adaptation of the ceramic veneers to the composite restorations as well as to enamel. The median percentages of marginal gap formation were 1.1% and less before TCML and 5.1% and less after TCML. The error-rates method revealed no statistical influence of the interface or of the viscosity of the luting material. Maximal values of dye penetration showed a significantly higher microleakage at veneers cemented with VU (median: 86.4%) compared to SC (median: 13.3%). In conclusion, the present data demonstrated that existing clinically acceptable class 3 composite restorations have no negative influence on the marginal adaptation of ceramic veneers. This was valid independent of the viscosity of the dual-curing composite resin cement when SC, VHV, or VLV was used.
Christgau
M
M
University of Regensburg, Dental School, Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, Germany.
Friedl
K H
KH
Schmalz
G
G
Edelmann
K
K
D002516:Ceramics; D003188:Composite Resins; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000517:prevention & control; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods; D003801:Dental Veneers; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D006801:Humans; D007180:Incisor; D008422:Materials Testing; D008437:Maxilla; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry; D014783:Viscosity
D003188:Composite Resins; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D019279:Resin Cements; D003776:Dental Porcelain; C023506:Glass ceramics