title: Totally bonded ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of the present study was to clinically evaluate the effect of two different adhesive/resin composite combinations for luting IPS Empress inlays with a special focus on luting gap wear and marginal adaptation.
  
  
  METHODS
  In the course of a controlled prospective clinical split-mouth study, 94 IPS Empress restorations were placed in 31 patients. The inlays were luted with EBS Multi + Compolute (EC; 3M ESPE) or with Syntac + Variolink II low (SV; Ivoclar Vivadent). At baseline and after 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 years, the ceramic restorations were examined according to modified USPHS codes and criteria. Thirty-five selected samples were investigated under an SEM regarding morphological changes; marginal quality analysis was carried out using a stereo light microscope, and luting composite wear was scanned with a profilometer.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Eight patients (including 25 restorations) missed the recalls; the recall rate at the last investigation was 72%. After 96 months of clinical service, seven restorations in five patients (six EC, one SV) had to be replaced due to hypersensitivities (n = 5) or inlay fractures (n = 2) resulting in a survival rate of 90%. Over the 8-year period, the restorations revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of surface roughness, color matching, proximal contact, sensitivity, or complaints (p > 0.05, Friedman test). Significant deteriorations were found for marginal integrity (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed for the different luting systems (p = 0.096, Log rank test/ Mantel Cox). Marginal analysis revealed no statistical difference among the materials (p > 0.05; Mann-Whitney U-test), however, the scans of the luting gap showed that Compolute was more prone to wear (p < 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For luting of ceramic inlays, no difference between the two luting systems was detectable. The overall failure rate after 8 years was 10%.
authors.affiliation: Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University Medical Center Carl Gustav Carus, University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
authors.forename: Norbert
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Krämer
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Taschner
authors.forename: Ulrich
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Lohbauer
authors.forename: Anselm
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Petschelt
authors.forename: Roland
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Frankenberger
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000538:Aluminum Silicates; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D019554:Dental Restoration Wear; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007284:Inlays; D008297:Male; D008689:Methacrylates; D008875:Middle Aged; D010756:Phosphoric Acids; D011446:Prospective Studies; D019279:Resin Cements; D055815:Young Adult
chemical_list: D000538:Aluminum Silicates; C418025:Compolute; C113072:EBS adhesive system; C075815:IPS-Empress ceramic; D008689:Methacrylates; D010756:Phosphoric Acids; D019279:Resin Cements; C078484:Syntac dentine adhesive; D003776:Dental Porcelain; C103502:Variolink