Brackett W W, Gilpatrick R O, Browning W D, Gregory P N
University of Tennessee-Memphis, College of Dentistry, Department of General Dentistry 38163, USA.
Oper Dent. 1999 Jan-Feb;24(1):9-13.
This study was a 2-year clinical evaluation of a conventional and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material. Thirty-four restorations each of Ketac-Fil and Photac-Fil were placed without tooth preparation in cervical abrasion/abfraction lesions, primarily in premolar teeth. Patients ranged in age from 30 to 73 years, with a median age of 45 years. Isolation for the restorations was accomplished with cotton rolls. Restorations of both materials were retained at the rate of 93%, and both were comparable in appearance, receiving Alfa ratings for more than 85% of the restorations. One occurrence of secondary caries was observed for each material. No significant difference between the materials was observed for any evaluation category (exact binomial test, P > 0.05).
本研究是对一种传统玻璃离子修复材料和一种树脂改性玻璃离子修复材料进行的为期两年的临床评估。在未经牙体预备的颈部磨损/楔状缺损病变中，主要是在前磨牙上，分别放置了34个Ketac-Fil和Photac-Fil修复体。患者年龄在30岁至73岁之间，中位年龄为45岁。修复体的隔湿采用棉卷完成。两种材料修复体的保留率均为93%，外观相当，超过85%的修复体获得Alfa评级。每种材料均观察到1例继发龋。在任何评估类别中，两种材料之间均未观察到显著差异（精确二项式检验，P>0.05）。
