Methods: 32 patients received altogether 36 posterior crowns made of zirconia (Lava DVS, 3M Deutschland, Seefeld, Germany). Seventeen crowns were cemented using a glass ionomer cement [GIC] (Ketac Cem, 3M Deutschland, Seefeld, Germany) and 19 restorations were luted with an experimental self-adhesive resin cement [SAR] (SFCem-44, 3M Deutschland, Seefeld, Germany). The patients were interviewed 7, 28 and 70 days after insertion with respect to hypersensitivities on the abutment teeth. They were asked to assess occurring sensations by means of a rating scale from 1 (no complaints at all) to 10 (severe discomfort). The ratings were analyzed descriptively (median values) and the results of GIC and SAR were compared with each other (Mann-Withney U – test).
Results: After 7 days GIC and SAR showed median values of 1.00 (min. 1, max. 2) and 1.00 (min. 1, max. 8), respectively. The 28 days results were 1.00 for GIC and 1.00 (min. 1, max. 5) for SAR. The evaluation after 70 days revealed 1.00 (min. 1, max. 2) for GIC and 1.00 (min. 1, max. 6) for SAR. In the SAR-group, 5 patients stated hypersensitivities after cold or hot stimuli and/or occlusal load; in 3 patients the symptoms disappeared and 2 patients reported an increase of symptoms compared to baseline. In the GIC-group minimal complaints were reported at baseline. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 cements concerning hypersensitivities.
Conclusions: Both cements exhibited satisfying results with regard to hypersensitivities, although few complaints were reported which might be a result of higher tooth destruction or a complicated and longer treatment.