Brackett W W, Browning W D, Ross J A, Brackett M G
Department of Adult Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, PO Box 830740, Lincoln, NE 68583-0750, USA.
Oper Dent. 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):12-6.
This study compared the clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material over two years. Thirty-four pairs of restorations of Compoglass and Fuji II LC were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. A significantly higher incidence of failed restorations was found with the polyacid-modified resin composite (p < 0.05).
本研究比较了一种聚酸改性树脂复合材料和一种树脂改性玻璃离子修复材料在两年内的临床性能。将34对Compoglass和Fuji II LC修复体放置于未经牙体预备的无龋性颈部侵蚀/磨损病变中。在基线、6个月、12个月、18个月和24个月时,使用改良的Ryge/USPHS标准对修复体进行临床评估。结果发现,聚酸改性树脂复合材料修复体失败的发生率显著更高(p < 0.05)。