The difference of the two techniques did not reach statistical significance in order to recommend one technique over the other .
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Resin composite material s , placed directly or indirectly , exhibit a promising long-term clinical performance when rehabilitation of posterior teeth is needed .
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the long-term clinical performance of direct versus indirect composite inlays/onlays  in posterior teeth .
Although many years in clinical practice , the selection of the best treatment protocol still remains subjective .
Cervical microleakage in MOD restorations: in vitro comparison of indirect and direct composite.
This study compared microleakage between  indirect composite inlays and direct composite restorations . Forty-eight st and ard inlay MOD cavities , with cervical margins located either in enamel or dentin , were prepared in extracted human third molars . The specimens were r and omly divided into 3 groups ( n=16 ) . In the control group , the cavities were restored with the composite Filtek Z250 ( 3 M ESPE ) . For the experimental groups , indirect restorations were made with the Artglass ( Heraeus-Kulzer ) or Belleglass HP ( Kerr Laboratories ) systems and cemented with the dual curing cement RelyX ARC ( 3 M ESPE ) . The adhesive system Single Bond ( 3 M ESPE ) was applied on all groups . The specimens were su bmi tted to thermolcycling , coated with nail varnish , then immersed in 2 % basic fuchsine aqueous solution for 24 hours . The teeth were then sectioned and leakage scores were evaluated ( 40x ) , based on a st and ard ranking . Data were su bmi tted to statistical analysis ( Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests ) with a 95 % confidence level . No statistical difference was found between substrates ( p=0.595 ) , and the material s performed similarly in dentin ( p=0.482 ) . Direct restorations showed higher leakage than indirect restorations at the enamel margins ( p=0.004 ) . Within the limitations of this experimental design , overall leakage was similar between both substrates , while the indirect systems provided a better sealing than direct composites only in enamel
The difference of the two techniques did not reach statistical significance in order to recommend one technique over the other .
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Resin composite material s , placed directly or indirectly , exhibit a promising long-term clinical performance when rehabilitation of posterior teeth is needed .
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the long-term clinical performance of direct versus indirect composite inlays/onlays  in posterior teeth .
Although many years in clinical practice , the selection of the best treatment protocol still remains subjective .