Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology was developed to ensure the sufficient strength of tooth restorations, to improve esthetic restorations with a natural appearance and to make the techniques easier, faster and more accurate. In the view of the limited research on the surface treatments of the CAD/CAM materials and the need to evaluate the ideal surface characteristics of a material to achieve the best adhesion to tooth tissues, this study aimed to investigate the surface roughness and morphology of four different CAD/CAM materials using four different surface treatments. The CAD/CAM materials used in this study were three composites (Shofu Block HC, Lava Ultimate and Brilliant Crios) and a hybrid ceramic (Enamic). The surface of the specimens of each material received one of the following treatments: no surface treatment, sandblasting with 29 μm Al2O3 particles, 9% hydrofluoric acid etching and silane application, and the tribochemical method using CoJet System. Surface roughness was evaluated using optical profilometry, and surface morphology was observed by means of scanning electron microscopy. All surface treatments resulted in higher surface roughness values compared to the control group. Different treatments affected the surface properties of the materials, presumably due to discrepancies in their composition and structure.

SUMMARYPurpose: This study compared the structural integrity and fracture mode of teeth restored with traditionally and minimally prepared resinbonded CAD/CAM inlays fabricated from the same material.Methods: Forty intact maxillary premolars were used and divided into four groups. Two groups were prepared according to a traditional inlay preparation design (2.0 mm occlusal reduction, a 1.5 mm wide proximal box and divergent walls) and two groups were prepared according to a newly proposed minimal preparation design (round shaped cavity with 1.0 mm occlusal reduction, a U-shaped proximal box 1.0 mm wide and parallel walls). Two restorative systems were tested: a composite system comprised of Paradigm MZ100 (3M ESPE) blocks and RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE) resin cement and a ceramic system comprised of ProCAD blocks (IvoclarVivadent) and Variolink II (Ivoclar-Vivadent) resin cement. The inlays were cemented according to the manufacturers' instructions. Each specimen was loaded axially to its occlusal surface at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute in a universal testing machine until fracture. The fracture load data were analyzed using ANOVA, comparing inlays of the same restorative material. Also, the mode of fracture of the inlays was recorded and analyzed using a non-parametric test (Kruskal-Wallis).Results: In the composite system case, the mean fracture load and SD were 1322 N (±445) for the traditional inlays and 1511 N (±395) for the mini- Clinical RelevanceMinimal preparation designs for inlay restorations are a viable option for CAD/CAM systems (CEREC) and could potentially strengthen the restored tooth. 538Operative Dentistry A mal inlays, while in the ceramic system case, those values were 1135N (±450) for the traditional inlays and 1761 N (±494) for the minimal inlays. Statistical analysis of the results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two designs for the composite system, while for the ceramic system, the minimally prepared teeth showed higher mean fracture strength. Non-parametric analysis (KruskalWallis) of the mode of fracture showed that there was no statistically significant difference between traditionally and minimally prepared inlays for both systems (p>.05).Conclusions: Under the conditions of this experimental study, only the ceramic inlays, when prepared with a minimal preparation design, demonstrated a higher fracture strength as compared to the traditionally prepared teeth. Use of the proposed minimal preparation design did not compromise the immediate post-operative structural integrity of teeth restored either with resin composite or ceramic inlays.