Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of proximal box elevation technique on marginal integrity of adhesively luted Cerec inlays

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

This in vitro study evaluated the marginal quality of Lava Ultimate inlays in deep proximal cavities with and without proximal box elevation (PBE) before and after thermomechanical loading (TML).

Materials and methods

Mesio-occluso-distal cavities with proximal boxes beneath the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) were prepared in 24 human molars. Then, one of the proximal boxes was elevated with Filtek Supreme above the CEJ. The specimens were divided into three groups (n = 8). The inlays of group A were adhesively luted to the cavities with Scotchbond Universal and Rely X Ultimate, the inlays of group B with Monobond Plus, Syntac, and Variolink II, and the inlays of group C with Clearfil Ceramic Primer and Panavia SA Cement. Epoxy resin replicas were taken before and after thermomechanical loading (1,200,000 cycles, 55 °C/5 °C, max. load 50 N). Marginal integrity at the different interfaces tooth/PBE, tooth/dentine, inlay/PBE, inlay/dentine was evaluated with scanning electron microscopy (×200). The percentage of continuous margin (% of total proximal margin length) was compared between the groups before and after TML. Statistics: Mann-Whitney U test (p = 0.05).

Results

No significant differences (p > 0.05) before and after TML were found between the three groups for bonding the inlay to dentine or to PBE composite.

Conclusions

The marginal integrities of bonding inlays directly to dentine are not different from bonding inlays to a proximal box, which has been elevated by a composite filling material. For deep proximal cavities, the PBE technique could be an alternative technique to conventional methods. Clinical research is needed to confirm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mehl A, Kunzelmann K, Folwaczny M, Hickel R (2004) Stabilization effects of CAD/CAM ceramic restorations in extended MOD cavities. J Adhes Dent 6:239–245

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Attia A, Abdelaziz KM, Freitag S, Kern M (2006) Fracture load of composite resin and feldspathic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns. J Prosthet Dent 95:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Harada A, Nakamura K, Kanno T, et al. (2015) Fracture resistance of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing-generated composite resin-based molar crowns. Eur J Oral Sci 123:122–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Giordano R (2006) Materials for chairside CAD/CAM–produced restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 137:14–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schmidt JC, Sahrmann P, Weiger R, Schmidlin PR, Walter C (2013) Biologic width dimensions--a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 40:493–504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dietschi D, Spreafico R (1998) Current clinical concepts for adhesive cementation of tooth-colored posterior restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 10:47–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Frankenberger R, Hehn J, Hajtó J, et al. (2013) Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of ceramic inlays in vitro. Clin Oral Investig 17:177–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zaruba M, Göhring TN, Wegehaupt FJ, Attin T (2013) Influence of a proximal margin elevation technique on marginal adaptation of ceramic inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 71:317–324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Gebhard R, Handel G (2006) Influence of stress simulation parameters on the fracture strength of all-ceramic fixed-partial dentures. Dent Mater 22:176–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brosius GBF (1995) SPSS base system and professional statistics, 1st edn. International Thomson Publishing, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  11. Krejci I, Reich T, Lutz F, Albertoni M (1990) An in vitro test procedure for evaluating dental restoration systems. 1. A computer-controlled mastication simulator. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 100:953–960

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Manhart J, Schmidt M, Chen HY, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (2001) Marginal quality of tooth-colored restorations in class II cavities after artificial aging. Oper Dent 26:357–366

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brosh T, Zary R, Pilo R, Gavish A (2012) Influence of periodontal ligament simulation and splints on strains developing at the cervical area of a tooth crown. Eur J Oral Sci 120:466–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brosh T, Porat N, Vardimon AD, Pilo R (2011) Appropriateness of viscoelastic soft materials as in vitro simulators of the periodontal ligament. J Oral Rehabil 38:929–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Heintze SD (2006) How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. Dent Mater 22:712–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lambrechts P, Debels E, van Landuyt K, Peumans M, van Meerbeek B (2006) How to simulate wear? Overview of existing methods. Dent Mater 22:693–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R (2004) Buonocore memorial lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 29:481–508

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Roulet JF, Reich T, Blunck U, Noack M (1989) Quantitative margin analysis in the scanning electron microscope. Scanning Microsc 3:147–158

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dietschi D, Olsburgh S, Krejci I, Davidson C (2003) In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases. Eur J Oral Sci 111:73–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Frankenberger R, Krämer N, Pelka M, Petschelt A (1999) Internal adaptation and overhang formation of direct class II resin composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig 3:208–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rocca GT, Gregor L, Sandoval MJ, Krejci I, Dietschi D (2012) In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases and interface treatments. "post-fatigue adaptation of indirect composite restorations". Clin Oral Investig 16:1385–1393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Soh MS, Yap AUJ, Siow KS (2003) The effectiveness of cure of LED and halogen curing lights at varying cavity depths. Oper Dent 28:707–715

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. El-Mowafy OM, Rubo MH (2000) Influence of composite inlay/onlay thickness on hardening of dual-cured resin cements. J Can Dental Assoc 66:147

    Google Scholar 

  24. Krämer N, Lohbauer U, Frankenberger R (2000) Adhesive luting of indirect restorations. Am J Dent 13:60D–76D

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Frese C, Wolff D, Staehle HJ (2014) Proximal box elevation with resin composite and the dogma of biological width: clinical R2-technique and critical review. Oper Dent 39:22–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Paolantonio M, D'ercole S, Perinetti G, et al. (2004) Clinical and microbiological effects of different restorative materials on the periodontal tissues adjacent to subgingival class V restorations. J Clin Periodontol 31:200–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Flores-de-Jacoby L, Zafiropoulos GG, Ciancio S (1989) Effect of crown margin location on plaque and periodontal health. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 9:197–205

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dietschi DL (2003) Evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of adhesive class II restorations. Dissertation, ACTA University of Amsterdam]

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Medical Center Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany

    Veronika Müller, Karl-Heinz Friedl, Katrin Friedl, Sebastian Hahnel, Gerhard Handel & Reinhold Lang

Authors
  1. Veronika Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karl-Heinz Friedl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katrin Friedl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sebastian Hahnel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gerhard Handel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Reinhold Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veronika Müller.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Funding

There was no external funding.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

It is not necessary, because no individual participants were included.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Müller, V., Friedl, KH., Friedl, K. et al. Influence of proximal box elevation technique on marginal integrity of adhesively luted Cerec inlays. Clin Oral Invest 21, 607–612 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1927-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1927-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation