The Bonding Protocol That Makes 3D-Printed Crowns Last

---

Why this page exists

In CAD/CAM composite and 3D-printed permanent crowns, debond — not

fracture — causes roughly **three out of four** clinical failures

(Salem et al., 2022, retrospective cohort, n=362). The single

intervention with the largest, most reproducible effect on bond

strength is the protocol you execute at cementation. Done well, a

3D-printed permanent resin crown bonds at 25–30 MPa shear bond

strength. Skip the surface preparation and you drop to 10 MPa.

Twelve times difference in tensile bond strength between the best

and worst protocols on BEGO VarseoSmile Crown plus (Moreira et al.,

2026). That's not a detail. That's the whole game.

This is the evidence-based protocol OCTOdent recommends for every

OCTOpod-printed crown, inlay, onlay, and bridge, with the specific

products and parameters that support it. Written clinician to

clinician.

---

The protocol at a glance

1. **Remove excess uncured resin** from the intaglio with a

high-volume electric air gun or the air/water syringe on

air-only. Drive the pooled resin out before it gets sticky.

2. **Scrub the intaglio** with a soft toothbrush dipped in 91%+

isopropyl alcohol. Dip, brush, dip, brush. No soaking.

3. **Air-abrade the intaglio** with 50 µm aluminum oxide at

1.5–2 bar, ~10 mm distance, 10–15 seconds per surface, until

uniformly matte.

4. **Verify visually.** Print layer lines should be visible in the

intaglio surface. A glossy or smooth appearance means residual

uncured resin — scrub and abrade again.

5. **Condition the intaglio** with a 10-MDP-containing primer

(Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus). One coat, dry thoroughly with

oil-free air until matte (not glossy — glossy = residual solvent).

6. **Prep the tooth, isolate, and cement** with a dual-cure adhesive

resin cement (Panavia V5). Tack cure 3–5 sec per surface, remove

excess, final cure ≥10 sec per surface (20–40 sec for thick or

opaque posterior crowns).

- Hydrofluoric acid on 3D-printed composite hybrid resin — it

degrades the surface.

- Self-adhesive cement on a non-retentive preparation — it debonds.

- Universal adhesive with a dual-cure cement across incompatible

brand lines — it under-cures at the interface.

- Cementation without effective isolation — saliva contamination in

30 seconds measurably lowers bond strength.

[Download the 1-page chairside protocol PDF →](#cta-pdf)

---

Why bonding matters

Unlike lithium disilicate, which fails predominantly by fracture,

predominantly by debonding.** Three data points to anchor this:

- **Salem et al., 2022** retrospective cohort of 362 CAD/CAM composite

crowns: 74.5% of all complications were debonds. Cumulative success

at 3 years, 49.5%. Non-adhesive cement use associated with

significantly higher failure. [Study](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266358)

- **Moreira et al., 2026** on 3D-printed VarseoSmile Crown plus:

adhesive resin cement with silane primer produced tensile bond

strength of **238 MPa**; self-adhesive resin cement, 106 MPa;

RMGIC, 20 MPa. A 12-fold difference from cement choice and primer

alone. [Study](https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_1096_25)

- **Dederichs et al., 2025** on 3D-printed Formlabs Permanent Crown:

bead-blast post-processing only, shear bond strength 10 MPa;

50 µm aluminum oxide at 1–2 bar, 25–30 MPa. [Study](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105621)

The clinical translation: the difference between a 5-year success

and a 6-month remake, statistically, is the protocol at cementation.

The tooth, the print, the impression — none of that rescues a poorly

bonded restoration.

---

Step-by-step detail

Step 1 — Remove excess uncured resin

Right after wash and post-cure, the intaglio surface of a printed

crown commonly holds residual uncured resin in the topography

(layer transitions, corners, deep fossae). You can't see all of it

because the surface looks matte from printing — but it will

interfere with primer wetting, bond formation, and cement cure.

Before the scrub step, physically evacuate the intaglio:

- **Preferred: high-volume electric corded air gun** (DataVac ED500,

Metro Vacuum MDV-1BA, or equivalent). Far more airflow than

shop-compressed air; dislodges pooled resin in seconds.

- **Alternative: operatory air/water syringe on air-only mode.**

Works fine and you already have it chairside. Aim directly into

the intaglio, work the stream around margins and corners.

Why this step matters: skipping it pushes uncured resin into the

next stages, where it gets fixed in place by solvent evaporation

during the scrub and stays there.

Step 2 — Scrub with IPA or ethanol

- Dip a soft-bristle dental toothbrush in **91%+ isopropyl alcohol**

(ethanol 95% works equally well — use whatever you stock).

- Scrub the intaglio vigorously. Brush, dip, brush, dip. Total

contact time 30–60 seconds.

- Dry with the air gun or air/water syringe.

the most commonly published cleaning protocol and is a valid

alternative. OCTOdent prefers scrub-and-wipe for three reasons:

1. **Overwash risk.** Kagaoan et al., 2024, demonstrated that

8 hours of ethanol exposure drops VarseoSmile bond strength

by 76%. Assistants mismanage timers. If a restoration gets

left in the bath too long, you have no way to know — the

crown looks fine but will debond within months.

2. **Takes longer.** A full ultrasonic cycle runs 3–5 minutes per

crown. Scrub-and-wipe is ~60 seconds. On a same-visit workflow,

this matters.

3. **No visual QC.** The scrub-and-wipe protocol lets you inspect

the intaglio between steps. The ultrasonic bath does not.

*This is OCTOdent clinical guidance based on clinician workflow

and the Kagaoan 2024 overwash data. Scrub-and-wipe has not been

directly compared head-to-head with ultrasonic cleaning in a

peer-reviewed bond-strength study. Both approaches are clinically

accepted.*

Step 3 — Air-abrasion

Specifications (the only parts that are non-negotiable):

- **Medium**: aluminum oxide (Al₂O₃). NOT silica-coated

tribochemical abrasive (Rocatec, CoJet) — those are for zirconia

and metal; they don't improve outcomes on composite hybrid resin.

- **Particle size**: **50 µm**. This is the consensus across BEGO,

SprintRay, Formlabs, and every 2023–2026 peer-reviewed study on

3D-printed permanent resin.

- **Pressure**: **1.5–2 bar** (22–30 psi). Dederichs 2025 showed

higher pressures (3 bar) produce slightly higher shear bond

strength but also more failures within the restoration body

itself — you start damaging the crown. 1.5–2 bar is the

evidence-based sweet spot.

- **Distance**: ~10 mm nozzle to surface.

- **Time**: 10–15 seconds per surface, moving the nozzle in small

circular passes. Stop when the surface is uniformly matte.

works. The unit doesn't need to be dental-branded. We've named the

Danville Microetcher II on our recommended-products page as a

reliable, mid-priced example; it doubles as a caries-control tool,

so it pays for itself beyond OCTOpod restorations. Whatever unit you

use, keep it calibrated.

TriniQ**: OCTOdent recommends air-abrading the intaglio regardless.

The incremental chair time is ~15 seconds per crown, the published

evidence for 50 µm Al₂O₃ across every comparable 3D-printed

permanent resin is consistent and strong, and the downside of

skipping the step — clinical debond — is not worth the savings.

Step 4 — Visual QC

Look at the intaglio under loupes or an operatory light.

- **Print layer lines should be visible.** A cleaned, abraded

intaglio shows the horizontal banding characteristic of SLA /

DLP printing. That's what you want.

- **If the surface looks glossy or smooth**, you still have a

film of uncured resin on the surface. Repeat the scrub step

and air-abrade again.

This is a clinical-experience heuristic, not a published QC

criterion. It takes five seconds and catches the single most common

lab-side preparation failure.

Step 5 — Chemical conditioning (primer)

Apply a 10-MDP-containing universal or ceramic primer.

primer contains 10-MDP and pre-hydrolyzed silane, and is the

matched primer for the Panavia V5 cement workflow. One coat, full

coverage including margins. Dry thoroughly with oil-free air for

at least 5 seconds. The surface should appear uniformly matte and

dry — glossy means residual solvent, which will inhibit cement

polymerization at the interface.

systems): any modern 10-MDP-containing primer from a major

manufacturer, following the cement manufacturer's IFU. Do NOT add a

separate silane step — modern universal and ceramic primers are

pre-silanized, and adding a free silane layer can reduce bond

strength by creating a thick, brittle siloxane film at the

interface.

Step 6 — Tooth-side preparation

This is the one step where pediatric, adult, and geriatric patients

diverge meaningfully. Dealt with in detail under "Special

considerations" below. The general protocol:

1. **Isolate.** See the isolation section below.

2. **Pumice** the preparation to remove temporary cement and

biofilm. Rinse thoroughly.

3. **Selective enamel etch** with 37% phosphoric acid for 15–30

seconds on enamel margins only. Rinse 10 seconds. Dry (do not

desiccate dentin).

4. **Apply the tooth primer / adhesive** specified by your cement

system. For the Panavia V5 workflow: Panavia V5 Tooth Primer,

applied to the entire preparation for 20 seconds, then dried

thoroughly with mild oil-free air until no moisture remains

visible. Panavia V5 Tooth Primer's "touch-cure" technology

initiates cement polymerization on contact, which is why no

separate dual-cure activator is needed with the V5 system.

Isolation

Rubber dam is the standard of care for adhesive cementation of

indirect restorations. Falacho et al., 2023, showed bond strength

to enamel is significantly higher with rubber dam than with

cotton-roll isolation. Saliva contains amylase and matrix

metalloproteinases that degrade the hybrid layer and inhibit

cement polymerization — 30 seconds of contamination measurably

reduces bond strength.

for crown cementation because rubber dam placement on a prepared

posterior can be technically difficult. Both alternatives below

are clinically acceptable if executed with consistent technique.

- **Preferred**: rubber dam with a dedicated clamp on the prepared

tooth, or a split-dam technique if the margin is subgingival.

- **Acceptable**: DryShield or Isolite — full-field isolation

systems with integrated suction and bite block. Bond strength

slightly lower vs. dam in published studies but clinically

acceptable for cementation.

- **Fallback**: cotton rolls and retraction cord. Highest

contamination risk; requires the most attentive technique.

Change rolls frequently, use retraction cord for subgingival

margins, and be prepared to re-abrade / re-prime the crown if

the intaglio gets contaminated.

aluminum chloride or ferric sulfate on a pellet or cord, rinse

thoroughly, re-isolate. Blood on an abraded, primed intaglio

destroys the bond and cannot be rescued by Ivoclean; re-abrade

and re-prime the crown.

Cementation sequence (Panavia V5 workflow)

The order matters.

1. **Load** the Panavia V5 automix dispenser with a fresh mixing

tip. Extrude a thin, even layer of cement into the intaglio.

Do not fill — leave an air-escape path or you won't seat fully.

2. **Seat** the crown with firm, steady apical pressure. Maintain

seating pressure throughout tack cure.

3. **Tack cure** 3–5 seconds per surface (facial, lingual,

occlusal, mesial, distal). This gels the excess cement for

removal.

4. **Remove excess** with an explorer and unwaxed floss. Window is

~20–40 seconds. Act fast — if you tack-cure too long (10+

seconds), the excess fully cures and you'll be chipping

stone-hard flash off the margins.

5. **Final light cure** at ≥1000 mW/cm², calibrated within 6

months. Baseline: 10 seconds per surface. **For thick or

opaque posterior printed crowns: extend to 20–40 seconds per

surface.** Printed resin attenuates cure light more than

ceramic, especially through 2+ mm of material. Don't rely on

the cure light alone; Panavia V5's dual-cure chemistry completes

what the light doesn't finish.

6. **Glycerin oxygen barrier** (Liquid Strip or equivalent).

Apply along the margins, light-cure an additional 10 seconds

per surface. This cures the oxygen-inhibited layer at the

cement margin.

7. **Remove dam or isolation**. Check occlusion with articulating

paper. Adjust high spots with fine diamond and polishing discs;

avoid aggressive adjustment near the cement margin.

8. **Floss** all contacts to verify no cement tag remains.

9. **Document** in the chart: cement lot, primer lot, cure time,

isolation method, any complications.

---

The 8 mistakes that cause debonds

These are the errors we see when 3D-printed permanent crowns fail

early. Each is avoidable.

1. "The lab already bead-blasted it — I don't need to abrade."

Wrong. Post-processing with 50 µm glass beads at 1.5 bar is a

cleaning step, not a bonding preparation. Dederichs 2025 showed

bead-blast-only controls gave 10 MPa shear bond strength; adding

chairside 50 µm Al₂O₃ abrasion raised it to 25–30 MPa. **Always

abrade chairside before cementation,** regardless of what

post-processing the lab or your printer did.

2. "It's resin, so I'll HF-etch it like lithium disilicate."

Wrong and actively damaging. Hydrofluoric acid does not create

productive retention on composite-hybrid resins; it strips the

resin matrix and reduces bond strength. Mao et al. 2024, Palomeque

et al. 2025, and SprintRay's IFU all converge: **do not use HF on

3D-printed composite hybrid materials.** HF is for glass-matrix

ceramics only (lithium disilicate, feldspathic, Vita Enamic).

3. "I'll use self-adhesive cement to save time."

Acceptable for retentive preparations with good axial wall height

and minimal taper. **Not acceptable for non-retentive preps or

esthetic anterior cases.** Moreira 2026 showed a 2× drop in tensile

bond strength on VarseoSmile when self-adhesive was substituted for

the full adhesive workflow. For a printed permanent crown you want

to last, use primer + dual-cure adhesive cement.

4. "Universal adhesive with any dual-cure cement — universal means universal."

Wrong. Most universal adhesives (Scotchbond Universal, Clearfil

Universal Bond Quick 2, All-Bond Universal) are acidic and

interfere with the tertiary amine co-initiators of dual-cure

resin cements. Without the matched pairing or a dual-cure

activator, cement under-cures at the adhesive interface — the

bond looks fine at seating and fails 12–36 months later. **Use

matched systems**: Panavia V5 Tooth Primer with Panavia V5 (no

activator needed — touch-cure handles it). If you're switching

cement systems, read the pairing chart in the IFU before the case.

5. "I'll skip the dam — it's just a crown cementation."

Wrong. Saliva contamination of the hybrid layer degrades bond

strength within 30 seconds and cannot be fully recovered by drying

and re-etching. Falacho 2023 quantified the difference. This is

the cheapest step that prevents the most expensive failure. Rubber

dam is preferred; DryShield / Isolite is an acceptable alternative;

cotton rolls work only with attentive, consistent technique.

6. "I'll soak the crown in ethanol for 10 minutes to really clean it."

Wrong. Kagaoan 2024 showed 8 hours of ethanol exposure dropped

VarseoSmile bond strength by 76%. Printed crown resins have

time-limited solvent resistance; prolonged soaking weakens the

surface you're trying to bond to. Keep wash time inside the

manufacturer's recommended window (5–10 minutes max), or use the

OCTOdent scrub-and-wipe protocol — which removes the overwash

failure mode entirely.

7. "I'll tack-cure for 10 seconds so the excess is really firm."

Wrong. Tack cure is 3–5 seconds — the window where the cement is

gelled but not yet fully cured, so you can peel the excess away

with floss and an explorer. Go to 10 seconds and the cement fully

cures; now you're chipping fully-cured flash off the margin with an

ultrasonic scaler, risking fracture at the bond line.

8. "10 seconds of final cure is always fine."

For a thin anterior veneer, yes. For a posterior printed crown

with 2 mm of opaque ceramic-filled resin between your cure tip and

the cement, you're delivering maybe half the light you think you

are. **Extend final cure to 20–40 seconds per surface for thick

or opaque posterior printed crowns,** and use a cement with strong

self-cure capability so dual-cure chemistry finishes what the

light doesn't reach. Panavia V5's touch-cure tooth primer is

specifically designed for this scenario.

---

Product recommendations

OCTOdent's recommended companion products for this protocol. Links

are Amazon-affiliated through our `octodent-20` associate tag.

Cement & primer (featured)

| Product | Role | Where to buy |

|---|---|---|

| **Kuraray Panavia V5 Kit** (Automix) | Featured dual-cure adhesive resin cement | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **Kuraray Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus** | Matched 10-MDP primer for V5 workflow | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

Air abrasion

| Product | Role | Where to buy |

|---|---|---|

| **Danville Microetcher II** | Bench microetcher, 50 µm Al₂O₃ at 1.5–2 bar | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **50 µm aluminum oxide refill** (generic dental grade) | Abrasive medium | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

Cleaning & drying

| Product | Role | Where to buy |

|---|---|---|

| **DataVac ED500** (or Metro MDV-1BA) | High-volume corded electric air gun for removing excess resin and drying | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **91%+ isopropyl alcohol** or 95% ethanol | Scrub solvent | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **Soft dental toothbrush** | Scrub brush | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

Post-cementation

| Product | Role | Where to buy |

|---|---|---|

| **Ivoclean** | Post-try-in intaglio decontamination | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **Liquid Strip** (glycerin oxygen barrier gel) | Margin cure completion | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

| **Rubber dam kit** (Hygenic / Coltene) | Preferred isolation | Amazon — `octodent-20` affiliate link |

Alternative cement systems (category-agnostic)

If you're already running a different adhesive dual-cure cement

system (Variolink Esthetic DC, RelyX Ultimate, Multilink Automix,

G-CEM LinkForce), follow your cement manufacturer's matched primer

and tooth-side protocol. The core principles — 50 µm Al₂O₃

abrasion, 10-MDP primer, dual-cure adhesive cement, effective

isolation — are the same. OCTOdent features Panavia V5 because the

published evidence on 3D-printed VarseoSmile and Crowntec supports

it as the strongest-performing option in head-to-head comparisons

(Donmez 2023). Switch only if you have a system you trust and that

you already execute consistently.

---

Special considerations

Pediatric primary teeth

- Thinner enamel, wider tubules, higher organic content than

permanent dentition.

- **Rubber dam is essential** — pediatric saliva is aggressive and

primary tooth bonding is less forgiving of moisture.

- Selective enamel etch for 15 seconds (shorter than adult

protocol); universal adhesive; dual-cure cement.

- The current clinical evidence on 3D-printed permanent resin crowns

in primary dentition is limited. One 12-month RCT showed stainless

steel crowns at 100% survival vs. 3D-printed resin crowns at

82.1% in the same window. Position printed resin crowns for

**esthetic pediatric cases** (anteriors, visible posteriors,

parent-priority esthetics); retain SSC as the default for

multi-surface post-pulpectomy primary molars per current AAPD

guidance. [More on the pediatric case library page →](#)

Geriatric / elderly dentition

- Sclerotic root dentin is hypermineralized with occluded tubules

and reduced bond strength compared to freshly cut dentin.

- Two mitigations with literature support: (a) EDTA conditioning

before self-etch adhesive increases bond strength and reduces

degradation; (b) selective-etch with 37% H₃PO₄ for 15 seconds

specifically on sclerotic zones before universal adhesive.

- Double-apply the adhesive; use active scrubbing motion; extend

primer dwell time.

- Rubber dam still preferred; if patient can't tolerate, DryShield

or a split-dam approach.

- Root caries cases: the evidence favors well-bonded composite

over glass ionomer cement for longevity, but the evidence base

is weak (Schmidt 2023, low confidence grading). Judgment call

per case. [More on the geriatric case library page →](#)

Endodontically treated teeth

- Ferrule is the dominant predictor of long-term success, not the

cement. Preserve 1.5–2 mm circumferential ferrule.

- Post and core considerations are out of scope for this page; the

cementation protocol above applies to the final crown regardless

of post/core status.

---

Evidence anchors

Key citations for the clinician who wants the papers. Full source

list below.

- **Salem et al., 2022** — 74.5% debond complication rate, n=362

CAD/CAM composite crowns.

- **Dederichs et al., 2025** — 50 µm Al₂O₃ at 1–2 bar raises shear

bond strength 2.5–3× on 3D-printed permanent crown resin.

- **Moreira et al., 2026** — 12× difference in tensile bond strength

on VarseoSmile between best adhesive protocol and worst

non-adhesive protocol.

- **Donmez et al., 2023** — Panavia V5 + Clearfil Ceramic Primer

Plus produced highest shear bond strength among dual-cure cements

tested on VarseoSmile and Crowntec.

- **Kagaoan et al., 2024** — 8-hour ethanol exposure drops

VarseoSmile bond strength 76%.

- **Mao et al., 2024 / Palomeque et al., 2025** — hydrofluoric acid

etching contraindicated for 3D-printed composite hybrid resins.

- **Falacho et al., 2023** — rubber dam isolation produces

significantly higher enamel bond strength vs. cotton roll.

- **Kagaoan et al., 2024 (SR)** — systematic review of bond strength

on additively manufactured crown materials: protocol with 50 µm

Al₂O₃ abrasion produces bond strengths comparable to milled

materials; no specific cement brand proved superior; surface

preparation is the dominant variable.

---

Disclaimer

This protocol is provided as educational and clinical reference

material for licensed dental practitioners. It is based on

peer-reviewed literature current as of April 2026 and on clinical

experience using the OCTOpod workflow.

Recommendations apply to 3D-printed composite-hybrid permanent resin

restorations (BEGO VarseoSmile TriniQ and comparable materials);

they do not apply to lithium disilicate, zirconia, or PMMA

materials.

Cement manufacturer instructions for use (IFU) supersede any

recommendation on this page where the two conflict. Nothing on this

page constitutes dental advice, a guarantee of clinical outcome, or

a substitute for the practitioner's independent clinical judgment.

OCTOdent does not accept liability for clinical outcomes associated

with use of this protocol.

The evidence base for 3D-printed permanent crown bonding is largely

in vitro as of April 2026; no published RCTs with ≥3 year clinical

follow-up exist for this specific indication. OCTOdent will update

this page as new evidence appears.

OCTOdent may earn a commission on purchases made through links on

this page, at no additional cost to the buyer.

Protocol last reviewed: **2026-04-18**.

---

Related OCTOpod resources

- Printing Workflow *(coming soon)*

- Post-Processing Protocol (wash + cure) *(coming soon)*

- Try-In & Fit Check *(coming soon)*

- Pediatric Case Library *(coming soon)*

- Geriatric Case Library *(coming soon)*

- Troubleshooting Common Print Failures *(coming soon)*

- CDT Codes & Reimbursement Guide *(coming soon)*

---

Download the chairside reference

- **1-page protocol PDF** — the 6-step protocol and the 8 mistakes,

formatted to print and tape inside the operatory cabinet.

[Download →](/downloads/octodent-bonding-protocol-chairside.pdf) *(link live when PDF generated)*

- **Product shopping list PDF** — every companion product with Amazon

links. [Download →](/downloads/octodent-bonding-protocol-shopping-list.pdf) *(link live when PDF generated)*

Get the OCTOpod Starter Kit

Print chairside resin restorations for every case on this page,

for every patient in your operatory, starting today.

---

Full source list

- Salem R et al. Potential complications of CAD/CAM-produced resin

composite crowns on molars: retrospective cohort over 4 years.

PLOS ONE, 2022. [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266358)

- Dederichs M et al. Effect of surface conditioning on the adhesive

bond strength of 3D-printed resins. J Dent, 2025.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105621)

- Moreira MC et al. Surface pretreatment and cement influence on

bond strength of 3D-printed permanent restorations.

J Conserv Dent Endod, 2026.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_1096_25)

- Donmez MB et al. Bond strength of additively manufactured composite

resins to dentin and titanium with dual-polymerizing cements.

J Prosthet Dent, 2023.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.04.003)

- Kagaoan RM et al. Factors influencing the bond strength of

additively manufactured crown materials: a systematic review.

J Dent, 2024. [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104908)

- Kagaoan RM et al. Prolonged post-washing in ethanol decreases

bond strength of additively manufactured crown materials.

J Dent, 2024. [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104873)

- Mao Y et al. Effect of surface treatment strategies on bond

strength of additively and subtractively manufactured hybrid

materials. Clin Oral Investig, 2024.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05767-3)

- Palomeque LM et al. 3D-printed and milled composite materials for

definitive restorations Part 2. J Prosthet Dent, 2025.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.09.033)

- Falacho RI et al. Clinical in-situ evaluation of the effect of

rubber dam isolation on bond strength to enamel.

J Esthet Restor Dent, 2023.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12979)

- Küçükekenci AS et al. Bond strength of recently introduced CAD-CAM

resin-based crown materials to PEEK and titanium. J Prosthet Dent,

2024. [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.07.019)

- Alvarenga JA et al. Self-adhesive resin cement versus conventional

cements on failure rate of indirect single-tooth restorations:

systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. J Prosthet Dent,

2024. [DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.04.027)

- Schmidt JC et al. Restorative management of root caries lesions:

systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent, 2023.

[DOI](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104776)