It never fails. Just about every other week, there is a post similar to this:

I have been hearing several people mention they routinely cement e.max with RMGI cements. How does the research compare to bonding? ( clinical data would be great, I know bonding done in lab studies far exceeds cement). Esthetics? HT vs LT? Do you need to change parameters? Minimal thickness and cement spacer? I would love to hear comments from those who have been cementing. Thanks.

It is my opinion that the reason many people use e.max is for its added strength, especially in the molar area. So what is the relative difference between bonding and cementing? What are you giving up for strength for the ease of cementing?

The slides I am going to show are from one of the over 1500 videos on cerecdoctors.com. Dr. Dennis Fasbinder did a video on this subject. First:

So what is happening here? Well, if you are looking for strength, adhesive bonding is what will insure this.

And what about relative strengths? I know there are a lot of CERECers who would never place Empress Cad on a molar. Oh the travesty of doing that!!!! But let’s look at this:

The strength of a 1.5mm thick e.max cemented is the same as a 1.5mm bonded Empress CAD. And look at a cemented e.max at 1.0mm cemented. But we know ALL of you use e.max at 1.5mm!!!!! ;-)

So if you wouldn’t use Empress CAD, why would you use e.max cemented? Something to ponder and chew on!

To see more on this subject visit https://www.cerecdoctors.com/discussion-boards/view/id/37507

Excellent Mark! When we train new CEREC owners this always comes up. The usual approach is to try not to rock the boat much as they are adapting to the whole newness and learning curve of the CEREC and if they are currently cementing I don't usually try to get them to change. That said, they really need to see this data and then make the choice of whether to continue cementing or learn to bond. Again well done Mark.