摘要
目的评价并比较金合金嵌体、Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体、IPS EmpressⅡ铸瓷嵌体与复合树脂直接充填的修复效果。方法选择138例患者189颗牙体缺损的磨牙,分别制作金合金嵌体45个、Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体48个、IPS EmpressⅡ铸瓷嵌体44个、复合树脂直接充填52个,应用美国公共健康协会的修正标准,每半年复查一次,评价修复效果。结果 3种嵌体在修复体颜色、边缘密合度、继发龋、食物嵌塞等指标上差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);在修复体完整性上铸瓷嵌体逊于金合金嵌体、聚合瓷嵌体(P<0.05);树脂充填的各项临床指标低于嵌体修复,在牙龈反应、食物嵌塞上差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论嵌体是较好的牙体缺损修复体,在恢复邻接关系和保持牙周健康等方面明显优于树脂充填。
Objective To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of Au alloy inlays, IPS Empress Ⅱ ceramic in- lays, Ceramage inlays and resin restoration in restoring the molar defect. Methods 45 Au alloy inlays, 48 Ceramage inlays, 44 IPS Empress Ⅱ ceramic inlays and 52 composite resin were used to restore 189 molars from 138 patients re- spectively. All restorations were evaluated after half a year according to modified USPHS parameters. Results There was no significant difference in the color match, marginal sealability, secondary carries and food embed between the three groups （P 〉 0.05）. The Au alloy inlays and Ceramage inlays showed a significantly better performance in resis- ting fracture than the ceramic inlays （P 〈 0.05 ）. There was a significant difference in the gingival response and food embed between the resin fillings and the inlays （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion It is an intriguing method using inlays to re- store the molar defect, which is superior to resin restoration in the aspects of restoring proximal relationship and maintai- ning periodontal health.
出处
《山东大学学报（医学版）》
CAS
北大核心
2012年第12期118-121,共4页
Journal of Shandong University:Health Sciences
