* denotes required field

Your Name: *



Gender: *

Personal Email: *

This will be your username

Password: *

Display Name: *

This will be what others see in social areas of the site.

Address: *










Phone Number:

School/University: *

Graduation Date: *

Date of Birth: *

ASDA Membership No:





Hi returning User! please login with Facebook credentials where Facebook Username is same as THENEXTDDS Username.




Comments (0)

Intracoronal Restorations - Part II

As patients seek aesthetic treatment that is biocompatible, durable, and safe, the utilization of composite resin for the direct restoration of the posterior dentition has continued to increase.  In the past, composite resins were often affected by factors (eg, low wear resistance, color variation, low flexural strength) that limited their use to smaller restorations.  Newer formulations, however, have significantly enhanced the physical, mechanical, and optical properties that have increased their use in medium to larger restorations.

*Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials, University of Texas Health Science Center Dental Branch, Houston, TX; private practice, Institute of Aesthetic and Restorative Dentistry, Houston, TX.


Learning Objectives:

Upon completion of this video, the viewer should:

  • Understand consideration factors for the use of laboratory processed composite and porcelain intracoronal restorations
  • Be able to make comparisons between the attributes and capabilities of each system.


Related Reading:

  1. Touati B. Aidan N. Second generation laboratory composite resins for indirect restorations. J Esthet Dent 1997;9(3):108-118.
  2. Dietschi D, Magne P, Holz J. Recent trends in esthetic restorations for posterior teeth. Quintessence Int 1994;25(10):659-677.
  3. Terry D. Intracoronal restorations—Part I: Direct procedures. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2006;18(1):33-36.
  4. Pameijer CH, Grossman O, Adair PJ. Physical properties of a castable ceramic dental restorative material. J Dent Res 1980;59:474(Abstract No. 827).
  5. Goracci G, Mori G. Esthetic and functional reproduction of occlusal morphology with composite resins. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1999;20(7):643-648.
  6. Miller M. The Ratings. In: REALITY 2001. 15th ed. Houston, TX: REALITY Publishing; 1-360.
  7. Jagger DC, Harrison A. An in vitro investigation into the wear effects of unglazed, glazed, and polished porcelain on human enamel. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72(3):320-323.
  8. Meyer JM. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int 1990;21(10):823-831.
  9. Jackson RD. Aesthetic inlays and onlays: A clinical technique update. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1993;5(3):18-27.
  10. Gracis SE, Nicholls JI, Chalupnik JD, Yuodelis RA. Shock-absorbing behavior of five restorative materials used on implants. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4(3):282-291.
  11. Fuhrer N. Restoring posterior teeth with a novel indirect composite resin system. J Esthet Dent 1997;9(3):124-130.
  12. Craig RG, Ceramics. In: Restorative Dental Materials, 10th Ed. Mosby, St. Louis 1997; 482-483.
Sorry, your current access level does not permit you to view this page.