Pages 269-275, Language: EnglishBurke / Wilson / WattsSome variations in luting technique from those recommended by manufacturers may hold clinical advantages, but it is also necessary to evaluate other parameters of the performance of the restored unit. Among these is fracture resistance. Accordingly, indirect composite resin restorations were placed in standardized preparations under standardized conditions. Restorations were placed in three groups of 10 teeth, each group with a different luting procedure: luting with a composite resin restorative material, conventional luting but without enamel etching, and luting with a 4-META material. In another group the restorations were luted in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations, while two groups of sound teeth acted as control. Following compressive loading on a universal testing machine, the force required to cause fracture was recorded. The results indicated that optimal fracture resistance of teeth restored with indirect composite resin restorations was obtained when the 4-META-based luting material was used.
