Soares Carlos José, Martins Luis Roberto Marcondes, Fernandes Neto Alfredo Júlio, Giannini Marcelo
Operative Dentistry Laboratory, Piracicaba Dental School-State University of Campinas, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2003 Nov-Dec;28(6):689-94.
This study evaluated the marginal adaptation of four different inlay indirect restorative systems: feldspathic ceramic (Duceram LFC-Degussa) and three laboratory-processed resin composites (Solidex-Shofu; Targis-Ivoclar; Artglass-Heraeus Kulzer). Sixty mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) standard cavities were prepared in mandibular molars and divided randomly. Polyvinylsiloxane impressions were made and the restorations were prepared following the manufacturer's instructions. Marginal adaptation evaluation was accomplished using an image collector computer system with a digital gauging appliance at four points on the occlusal, proximal and gingival regions with 250x magnification. Among all the materials, the marginal discrepancy recorded on the gingival margins was statistically larger than that recorded on the proximal and occlusal regions. Duceram LFC showed greater marginal discrepancy than Solidex, Artglass and Targis, which showed no statistically significant differences among them.
长石质陶瓷(Duceram LFC - 德固赛)和三种实验室加工的树脂复合材料(Solidex - 松风;Targis - 义获嘉;Artglass - 贺利氏古莎)。在下颌磨牙上制备了60个近中 - 咬合 - 远中(MOD)标准洞型并随机分组。制取了聚乙烯硅氧烷印模,并按照制造商的说明制作修复体。使用带有数字测量装置的图像采集计算机系统,在咬合、邻面和牙龈区域的四个点以250倍放大率完成边缘适合性评估。在所有材料中,牙龈边缘记录的边缘差异在统计学上大于邻面和咬合区域记录的差异。Duceram LFC显示出比Solidex、Artglass和Targis更大的边缘差异,而Solidex、Artglass和Targis之间在统计学上没有显著差异。