PofoliaShared via Pofolia

BMC Oral Health· 2026Q1

In vitro evaluation of marginal adaptation and microleakage in CAD/CAM and direct composite restorations for permanent molars with extensive substance loss

Simin Kocaaydın, Koray Gençay

Short summary

CERASMART resin nanoceramic restorations showed significantly better marginal adaptation and lower microleakage compared to BRILLIANT Crios composite, Celtra Duo zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate, and GC Essentia direct composite in molars with extensive tooth structure loss.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • CERASMART resin nanoceramic exhibited significantly greater marginal adaptation (higher percentage of continuous margins) compared to other tested materials.
  • CERASMART restorations showed significantly lower microleakage than BRILLIANT Crios composite, Celtra Duo, and GC Essentia direct composite.
  • All tested materials achieved marginal adaptation values within clinically acceptable limits.
  • No significant difference in marginal adaptation or microleakage was observed among BRILLIANT Crios, Celtra Duo, and GC Essentia direct composite.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the marginal adaptation and microleakage of resin nanoceramic, composite, and zirconium-reinforced lithium disilicate ceramic restorations produced with computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) compared with direct resin composites in permanent molars with extensive loss of tooth structure. Mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared on 44 extracted molars and randomly divided into four groups ( n = 11). Group 1: CERASMART nanoceramic (GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan); Group 2: BRILLIANT Crios composite block (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland); Group 3: Celtra Duo zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate (Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany); Group 4: GC Essentia direct composite (GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan). Restored teeth embedded in acrylic were examined for marginal adaptation and continuity under a Quanta FEG 250 scanning electron microscope (FEI Company, Hillsboro, Oregon, USA) at 400x magnification. Microleakage was assessed using 0.5% basic fuchsin solution, followed by longitudinal sectioning and dye penetration scoring at 20x magnification with a stereomicroscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test; the Mann–Whitney U test was used for comparisons between two groups, the Kruskal–Wallis test for multiple group comparisons, and the Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables ( p < 0.05). The mean marginal adaptation values ranged from 16.92 ± 14.27 μm to 69.97 ± 41.15 μm. The percentage of continuous margins was significantly greater in the CERASMART group ( p < 0.05). CERASMART group also demonstrated significantly lower microleakage compared to other groups ( p < 0.05), while no significant difference was observed among other materials. All materials demonstrated marginal adaptation values within clinically acceptable limits. CERASMART resin nanoceramic showed superior marginal adaptation and lower microleakage than the other tested materials. These findings may provide clinical insight into restorative options in permanent molars with extensive loss of tooth structure; however, further clinical studies are required to confirm these results.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. BMC Oral Health, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Orthodontics

OrthodonticsDentistry