Clinical evaluation of the computer-aided designed/manufactured versus the semidirect composite inlay technique

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the clinical performance of computer-aided designed/manufactured (CAD/CAM) Grandio blocs and semidirect (GrandioSO) composite inlay restorations over 18 months. Patients and methods Twenty inlay restorations were placed in 10 patients, this a split mouth study, so every patient had two restorations. The restorations were randomized to two equal groups according to technique of inlay fabrication. Group I: (Grandio blocs) inlays fabricated with CAD/CAM technique. Group II: (GrandioSO) fabricated with semidirect technique. Clinical evaluations were performed after (7 days after cementation), 6, 12, and 18 months according to modified United States Public Health Service criteria. The marginal seal analyses of representative restored teeth at each evaluation period were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). All data was statistically analyzed with the software SPSS, version 25. Results The clinical parameters were analyzed with χ 2 test. No statistically significant difference ( P > 0.05) was found between the two groups at all evaluation periods. Marginal integrity was evaluated using SEM to confirm the recorded modified United States Public Health Service evaluation. SEM results detecting gaps at 18 months in group II (60% of restorations scored 0 gaps while 30% scored 1 and 10% scored 2) while in group I recorded (80% of the restorations scored 0 gaps and 20% scored 1) but these results were not statistically significant ( P > 0.05). Conclusions CAD/CAM Grandio blocs and semidirect GrandioSO inlay restorations provided excellent – good performance for all tested parameters, with the absence of any restoration loss, while minor restoration defects were detected that were rated acceptable throughout the 18-month evaluation period. Clinical significance Both tested Grandio blocs and GrandioSO composite inlay restorations had excellent – good performance for all tested criteria throughout the 18-month evaluation period.