Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 1484
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 25  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 258-263

Fracture resistance of lab composite versus all-ceramic restorations in class II inlay cavity preparations: An in vitro study

1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab, India
2 Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Dashmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
3 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Hazaribag College of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Smridhi Bhanot
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_261_21

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of inlay preparations restored with indirect lab composite, conventional and translucent monolithic zirconia-based ceramics. Materials and Methods: Fifty freshly extracted human maxillary premolars were selected for the study. Standardized inlay cavities were prepared and restored with indirect lab composite, conventional monolithic zirconia-based ceramic and translucent monolithic zirconia-based ceramic. After restoration each sample was subjected to axial compressive load with Universal testing machine. The force required to induce fracture was recorded in Newton (N). Statistical Analysis Used: The data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA test and Post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test. Results: Results revealed that fracture resistance of prepared inlay cavities restored with conventional monolithic zirconia-based ceramics was found to be best followed by other groups. Group I > Group IV > Group V > Group III > Group II. Conclusion: The fracture resistance of conventional monolithic zirconia-based ceramic inlays and translucent monolithic zirconia-based ceramic inlays were comparable with intact teeth but, indirect lab composite inlays showed lower fracture resistance than all.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded25    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal