van Dijken Jan W V
Department of Odontology, Dental School Umeå, Umeå University, Umea 901 87, Sweden.
Dent Mater. 2003 Nov;19(7):670-4. doi: 10.1016/s0109-5641(03)00011-3.
This study evaluated IPS Empress ceramic inlays luted with two chemical-cured luting agents, a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Plus (F)) and a resin composite (RC) (Panavia 21 (P)).
Seventy-nine ceramic inlays were placed in Class II cavities in 29 patients. At least two inlays were placed in each patient to compare the luting techniques intra-individually. In each patient half of the inlays were luted with F and the other half with P. The inlays were evaluated clinically, according to modified USPHS criteria (van Dijken, 1986), at baseline, after 6 months, and yearly during 5 years.
At 5 years, 71 inlays were evaluated. Two small partial fractures were observed at 3 years (1P, 1F). One inlay showed recurrent root caries at 4 years (P). Four inlays, two in each group showed non-acceptable color match (2P, 2F). Small defects were observed in 4 inlays (2P, 2F). A slight ditching of the cement margins was observed in both luting groups but did not seem to increase during the second half of the evaluation. No significant difference in durability was observed between the two luting agents.
IPS Empress inlays luted with the chemical-cured RC and the resin-modified glass ionomer cement functioned satisfactory during the 5 years follow-up.
本研究评估了采用两种化学固化粘结剂粘结的IPS Empress陶瓷嵌体，这两种粘结剂分别是树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀（富士Ⅱ型（F））和树脂复合材料（RC）（帕纳维阿21（P））。
在29例患者的Ⅱ类窝洞中放置了79个陶瓷嵌体。每位患者至少放置两个嵌体，以便在个体内比较粘结技术。在每位患者中，一半的嵌体用F粘结，另一半用P粘结。根据改良的美国公共卫生服务标准（van Dijken，1986），在基线、6个月后以及5年期间每年对嵌体进行临床评估。
5年后，对71个嵌体进行了评估。在3年时观察到2个小的部分折断（1个P，1个F）。1个嵌体在4年时出现复发性根龋（P）。4个嵌体，每组2个，显示颜色匹配不可接受（2个P，2个F）。在4个嵌体（2个P，2个F）中观察到小缺陷。在两个粘结组中均观察到粘结剂边缘有轻微沟痕，但在评估的后半期似乎没有增加。两种粘结剂在耐久性方面没有观察到显著差异。
在5年的随访期间，用化学固化RC和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀粘结的IPS Empress嵌体功能良好。
