['Although composite cements are generally indicated for cementation of all-ceramic restorations, some manufacturers of dental cements propose that resin-modified glass ionomers (RMGIs) may be used for cementation of high-strength ceramic restorations.', 'This study was undertaken to compare the in vitro abrasion and attrition wear of two dual-cure cements (in dual-cure and self-cure modes) and two RMGI cements when placed between ceramic and enamel to simulate the margin of a restoration.', "Rectangular fragments of pressed ceramic (Empress 2) were cemented between the halves of bovine incisors sectioned mesiodistally, using one of the following materials: RelyX ARC, Variolink II, RelyX Luting, or ProTec CEM. The two resin cements were tested in dual-cure and self-cure modes. A three-body wear test was performed in the new Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) oral wear simulator (100,000 cycles; abrasion load: 20 N; attrition load: 90 N). Degree of conversion of resin cements was determined by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Results were analyzed by analysis of variance and Tukey's test (p = .05). Epoxy replicas of wear specimens were observed in the scanning electron microscope.", 'No significant differences in abrasion wear (RelyX ARC dual-cure: 11 +/- 4.4 microm; RelyX ARC self-cure: 17 +/- 7.0 microm; Variolink dual-cure: 14 +/- 8.6 microm; Variolink self-cure: 23 +/- 10.7 microm) or attrition wear (RelyX ARC dual-cure: 18 +/- 6.4 microm; RelyX ARC self-cure: 31 +/- 4.5 microm; Variolink dual-cure: 32 +/- 6.8 microm; Variolink self-cure: 39 +/- 15.9 microm) were found between activation modes of the resin cements. ProTec CEM (32 +/- 8.7 microm) showed abrasion similar to that of Variolink II and RelyX ARC self-cure. Resin-modified glass ionomers showed more attrition wear than the resin cements (ProTec CEM: 62 +/- 13.0 microm; RelyX Luting: 69 +/- 7.1 microm). RelyX ARC showed a similar degree of conversion for both activation modes (dual-cure: 70 +/- 4.3%; self-cure: 68 +/- 1.2%), but Variolink II had a higher degree of conversion in dual-cure mode (67 +/- 0.5% vs 60 +/- 1.0%). Cement wear was accompanied by marginal breakdown and increased surface roughness of enamel and ceramic.'] Does in vitro wear simulation measurements of composite versus resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement for all-ceramic restorations?