Suppr超能文献

全口义齿修复中两种终印模技术及其相关戴入后调整的回顾性比较。

A retrospective comparison of two definitive impression techniques and their associated postinsertion adjustments in complete denture prosthodontics.

作者信息

Drago Carl J

机构信息

Department of Dental Specialists, Gundersen Lutheran Medical Center, 1836 South Avenue, LaCrosse, WI 45601, USA.

出版信息

J Prosthodont. 2003 Sep;12(3):192-7. doi: 10.1016/S1059-941X(03)00082-2.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the number of postinsertion adjustment visits required by edentulous patients whose dentures were made from border-molded definitive impressions using modeling plastic impression compound (traditional technique) with patients whose dentures were made from border-molded definitive impressions using heavy-body vinyl polysiloxane impression material.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective clinical study, 78 patients were treated with the traditional technique (custom impression trays border molded with gray modeling plastic impression compound) and 78 were treated with the modified technique (custom impression trays border molded with heavy-body vinyl polysiloxane impression material). In both techniques, definitive wash impressions were made with light-body vinyl polysiloxane impression material. Postinsertion visits were quantified for 1 year after the dentures were inserted.

RESULTS

The average number of adjustment visits for patients treated with the traditional technique was 2.68. The average number of adjustment visits for patients treated with the modified technique was 2.68. The data were compared using Student t tests. There was no significant difference in the number of adjustments required for patients whose dentures were made with either technique (t = 0.000, p = 1.00). There was no significant difference in the number of post-insertion visits required by patients from either population.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this clinical study, border-molding custom denture impression trays with vinyl polysiloxane impression material provided similar results in terms of postinsertion visits for one year as compared to dentures made from impressions border molded with modeling plastic impression compound.

摘要

目的

比较使用模型塑料印模膏进行边缘整塑最终印模制作义齿的无牙颌患者(传统技术)与使用重体乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模材料进行边缘整塑最终印模制作义齿的患者在义齿插入后所需的调整就诊次数。

材料与方法

在这项回顾性临床研究中,78例患者采用传统技术治疗(用灰色模型塑料印模膏进行边缘整塑的定制印模托盘),78例患者采用改良技术治疗(用重体乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模材料进行边缘整塑的定制印模托盘)。在两种技术中,均用轻体乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模材料制作最终的衬层印模。在义齿插入后1年内对调整就诊次数进行量化。

结果

采用传统技术治疗的患者平均调整就诊次数为2.68次。采用改良技术治疗的患者平均调整就诊次数为2.68次。使用Student t检验对数据进行比较。用两种技术制作义齿的患者所需调整次数无显著差异(t = 0.000,p = 1.00)。两组患者在义齿插入后所需的就诊次数也无显著差异。

结论

在本临床研究的局限性范围内,与使用模型塑料印模膏进行边缘整塑印模制作的义齿相比,用乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模材料进行边缘整塑定制义齿印模托盘在义齿插入后1年的就诊次数方面提供了相似的结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验