Cad/Cam Sistemi ile Üretilen Hibrit Seramik İnley ve Onley Restorasyonların Adezyonunda Farklı Rezin Simanların Etkisinin Klinik Olarak Karşılaştırılması
xmlui.mirage2.itemSummaryView.MetaDataShow full item record
The purpose of this clinical study is to evaluate the clinical comparison of two different adhesive resin cements, which have different content and application methods in the cementation of inlay/onlay restorations produced from hybrid ceramic using the CAD/CAM system. For this purpose, after the approval of Hacettepe University Clinical Studies Ethics Committe, 70 inlays/onlays were produced from Cerasmart (GC, Tokyo, Japan) hybrid nanoceramic block using CEREC Omnicam (Sirona Dental, Bensheim, Germany). Each group was randomly divided into two groups, 35 of which were restorations. One group was cemented with RelyX U200 Automix (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) self adhesive resin cement and the other group with G-Cem LinkForce (GC, Tokyo, Japan) etch and rinse adhesive resin cement to posterior vital teeth. Each restoration was clinically evaluated at 6, 12 and 18 months using modified USPHS criteria were also evaluated by two physicians calibrated. SPSS 23.0 program was used in the statistical analysis of the data. The comparisons were made using the Chi-square (χ2) test and Friedman test. In terms of modified USPHS criteria all restorations were clinically acceptable. The survival rate for RelyX U200 Automix self adhesive resin cement was evaluated %94.3 and the survival rate for G-Cem LinkForce etch and rinse adhesive resin cement was evaluated %91.4. No statistically significant difference was found between the clinical performances of both cements. After 18 months, both cement systems showed similar clinical performance in the cementation of inlay/onlay restorations produced from hybrid ceramic using the CAD / CAM system to the vital posterior teeth.