A randomized clinical study evaluating the 30‑month clinical performance of class II indirect restorations in endodontically treated teeth using ceramic, hybrid, and composite computer‑aided design/ computer‑aided production blocks

Abstract

Context (Background): In the literature, the information about which indirect material is the most appropriate for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth is insufficient. Therefore, studies evaluating the clinical performance of root canal-treated teeth will shed light on this issue for clinicians. Aim: This clinical study aimed to evaluate the clinical performances of class II indirect restorations using ceramic, hybrid, and composite blocks to endodontically treated teeth. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 indirect class II restorations were performed in 51 patients using Cerasmart (GC Dental Products Europe, Leuven, Belgium) composite, IPS e.max computer-aided design CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) ceramic, and Vita Enamic (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sackingen, Germany) hybrid blocks. All the restored teeth had root canal treatment. The restorations were evaluated using modified FDI criteria for 30 months. Statistical Analysis Used: The data were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis analysis and Friedman two-way analysis of variance. Results: A total of 53 restorations of the 60 restorations could be followed up at the end of 30 months. No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups after 30 months in terms of all criteria evaluated (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Composite, ceramic, and hybrid blocks showed successful clinical performance in endodontically treated posterior teeth with large material loss.