Objectives:This clinical study aims to evaluate the clinical performance of indirect class II restorations made using three different CAD/CAM blocks.
Materials and Methods: A total of 60 indirect class II restorations were performed in 41 patients using Cerasmart (GC Dental Products Europe, Leuven, Belgium) composite, IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) ceramic and Vita Enamic (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sackingen, Germany) hybrid blocks. The restorations were evaluated for 13 different criteria using modified FDI criteria at the end of one week, six months, and one year. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square, Fischer and Mc Nemar tests.
Results: Vita Enamic indirect restorations showed a statistically significant difference in terms of color matching criteria from Cerasmart and IPS e.max CAD using groups in all follow-up periods (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of other criteria (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: Cerasmart and IPS e.max CAD restorations showed better color matching than Vita Enamic restorations.
Keywords: CAD/CAM, Ceramic Block, Hybrid Block, Indirect Restoration
CAD/CAM, Ceramic Block, Hybrid Block, Indirect Restoration