The One-Year In Vivo Comparison of Lithium Disilicate and Zirconium Dioxide Inlays

Rini Behera; Lora Mishra; Darshan Devang Divakar; Abdulaziz A Al-Kheraif; Naomi Ranjan Singh; Monika Lukomska-Szymanska

doi:10.3390/ma14113102

The One-Year In Vivo Comparison of Lithium Disilicate and Zirconium Dioxide Inlays

Materials (Basel). 2021 Jun 5;14(11):3102. doi: 10.3390/ma14113102.

Authors

Rini Behera¹, Lora Mishra¹, Darshan Devang Divakar², Abdulaziz A Al-Kheraif², Naomi Ranjan Singh¹, Monika Lukomska-Szymanska³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Institute of Dental Sciences, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan, Bhubaneswar P.O. Box 751003, India.
² Dental Biomaterials Research Chair, Department of Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh P.O. Box 10219, Saudi Arabia.
³ Department of General Dentistry, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska St, 92-213 Lodz, Poland.

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the one-year clinical performance of lithium disilicate (LD) and zirconium dioxide (ZrO₂) class II inlay restorations. Thirty healthy individuals who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled for the study. The patients were randomly divided into two study groups (n = 15): LD (IPS e.max press) and ZrO₂ (Dentcare Zirconia). In the ZrO₂ group, the internal surfaces of the inlays were sandblasted and silanized with Monobond N (Ivoclar, Leichsteistein, Germany). In the LD group, the internal surfaces of the inlays were etched with 5% hydrofluoric acid. The ceramic inlays were cemented with self-cure resin cement (Multilink N). Clinical examinations were performed using modified United State Public Health Codes and Criteria (USPHS) after 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 months and 1 year. The one-year survival rate was evaluated. In total, one failure was observed in the ZrO₂ group. The survival probability after 1 year for the ZrO₂ inlays was 93%, and for the LD inlays was 100%, which was statistically insignificant. The differences between both groups for most USPHS criteria (except for colour match) were statistically insignificant. Within the imitations of the present study, the lithium disilicate- and zirconia dioxide-based inlays exhibited comparable clinical performances. However, the colour and translucency match was superior for the lithium disilicate restorations.

Keywords: CAD-CAM; inlay; lithium disilicate; zirconium dioxide.