Özet:

Purpose: The purpose of this randomized, controlled and one-centric clinical study is to compare the 1 year clinical performance of two-faced class 2 nanoceramic resin inley restorations prepared by the CAD/CAM system with direct composite resin restorations. Tools and Methods: 120 teeth with two-face (MO or OD) dirty damage or old restoration to be replaced were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups. Restorations in the experimental group were produced using the CAD/CAM system with nano-ceramic resin blocks (Lava Ultimate, 3M ESPE, USA), while the control group used a subsequent nano-hybrid composite resin (Clearfil Majesty Posterior, Kuraray, Japan) with the three-stage etch-and-rinse dentin adjective system for direct composite resin restorations. All the restorative materials tested were implemented according to the recommendations of the manufacturer companies. Clinical assessments were performed in the 1st week, 6th month and 1st year using the FDI criteria. The data was analyzed by Friedman's ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U tests (a = 0.05). Results: At the end of the first year, all restorations showed acceptable clinical performance that does not require an ideal or clinical attempt. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in all criteria. Only in the 1st year there was a significant decrease in the surface brightness of direct composite resin restorations to 2 scores (p = 0,046). The result: the 1 year clinical performance of the nanoceramic resin inley restorations prepared with the CAD/CAM system has been successful according to the FDI criteria. Keywords: CAD/CAM, inley, resin nano-ceramic, clinical performance EVALUATION OF THE CLINICAL PERFORMANCE OF CAD/CAM FABRICATED TWO SURFACE CLASS II RESIN NANO CERAMIC INLAY RESTORATIONS ABSTRACT Aim: The aim of this randomized, controlled, single center clinical trial was to evaluate the one year clinical performance of CAD/CAM manufactured resin nano-ceramic inlay restorations in two surface class II cavities in comparison with direct posterior composite restorations. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty 2-surface (MO/OD) various lesions or old restorations that needed to be replaced were included and randomly assigned into two groups. The restorations in experimental group were manufactured by a CAD/CAM system with resin nano ceramic blocks (Lava Ultimate, 3M ESPE, USA), while a posterior nanohybrid composite resin (Clearfil Majesty Posterior, Kuraray, Japan) was used for direct posterior composite restorations in control group with a three-step etch & rinse dentin adhesive system (Optibond FL, Kerr, USA). All tested restorative materials were used according to the manufacturers' instructions. Clinical evaluation was performed after 1 week, 6 months and 1 year according to the FDI criteria. The data were analyzed using Friedman's ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U tests (a = 0.05). Results: After 1 year, all restorations were clinically acceptable with no need for clinical attempt. Considering all criteria, the differences between two groups were not statistically significant. Only surface lustre of direct composite restorations significantly reduced to score 2 after 1 year (p = 0.046). Conclusion: The clinical performance of CAD/CAM manufactured resin nano ceramic inlay restorations was found successful according to FDI criteria after 1 year. Key words: CAD/CAM, inlays, resin nano ceramic, clinical performance

Anahtar Kelimeler: