Opdam Niek J M, Roeters Joost J M, Joosten Marieke, Veeke Olaf vd
Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University of Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9101, NL 6500 HB, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Dent Mater. 2002 Jan;18(1):58-63. doi: 10.1016/s0109-5641(01)00020-3.
The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of two resin composites with different handling properties and application techniques on the homogeneity of a restoration placed in small and large cavities. Furthermore, the operator-effect on the restorative procedure was studied.
Standardized Class I cavities of two sizes were prepared in artificial lower first molars. The cavities were restored with two resin composites (Surefil and Ecusit) using either a packing or an injection technique. Six operators were involved in the study, five general practitioners and one final-year dental student. Each operator restored 40 preparations, ten in each group. After finishing, the restorations were sectioned and inspected for the presence of voids and porosities.
240 restorations were placed and 480 sections were available for evaluation. Only 143 sections were totally free of porosities. For both the small and large preparation design the Ecusit composite used with the injection technique resulted in significantly less porosities in the restoration. Differences between operators were evident, but none of the operators achieved significantly better results with the packing technique than with the injection technique.
The use of a syringable resin composite results in a better adaptation of the restoration compared to a packable resin composite.
本研究旨在调查两种具有不同操作性能和应用技术的树脂复合材料对置于小和大窝洞修复体均匀性的影响。此外，还研究了操作者对修复过程的影响。
在人工下颌第一磨牙上制备两种尺寸的标准化I类窝洞。使用两种树脂复合材料（Surefil和Ecusit）通过填充或注射技术对窝洞进行修复。六名操作者参与了该研究，五名全科医生和一名牙科专业最后一年的学生。每位操作者修复40个预备体，每组10个。完成后，将修复体切片并检查是否存在空隙和孔隙。
共放置了240个修复体，有480个切片可供评估。只有143个切片完全没有孔隙。对于小和大的预备体设计，使用注射技术的Ecusit复合材料在修复体中产生的孔隙明显更少。操作者之间的差异很明显，但没有一位操作者使用填充技术获得的结果比注射技术明显更好。
与可填充树脂复合材料相比，使用可注射树脂复合材料可使修复体的适应性更好。
