Loguercio Alessandro D, Zago Camila, Leal Kiandra, Ribeiro Neila Rosane, Reis Alessandra
Department of Dental Materials and Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Oeste de Santa Catarina, Joaçaba, SC, Brazil.
Clin Oral Investig. 2005 Mar;9(1):18-20. doi: 10.1007/s00784-004-0287-y. Epub 2004 Nov 10.
The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance over 1 year of a microhybrid composite resin for class V restorations both lined and not lined with a flowable composite resin. Nineteen patients having at least two pairs of cervical noncarious lesions under occlusion were enrolled in this study. A total of 38 restorations were placed, half for each group (Single-Bond + Filtek-Flow + Filtek Z250, and Single-Bond + Filtek Z250). Two calibrated operators placed all restorations according to the manufacturers' instructions. Two other independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline and after a 12-month period according to the USPHS criteria and modified criteria for color match. The classic alpha score was divided into A1 for "not detectable" and A2 for "slightly discernible" filling. Statistical analysis was conducted using Fisher's exact test and McNemar's test (P=0.05). One restoration was lost after 12 months for each group (retention rate 95% for each group). After 12 months, 18 restorations showed a trend towards dark yellowing (color match A2). The use of Filtek Flow as a liner under Filtek Z250 restorations did not improve the clinical performance of class V restorations after 6 and 12 months of evaluation.
本研究的目的是比较一种用于Ⅴ类洞修复的微混合复合树脂在使用和不使用可流动复合树脂衬层时1年的临床性能。19例至少有两对咬合面下颈部非龋性病变的患者纳入本研究。共放置了38个修复体，每组各半（单键粘结剂+Filtek流动树脂+Filtek Z250复合树脂，以及单键粘结剂+Filtek Z250复合树脂）。两名经过校准的操作人员按照制造商的说明放置所有修复体。另外两名独立检查人员根据美国公共卫生服务部（USPHS）标准和颜色匹配的修改标准在基线和12个月后对修复体进行评估。经典的α评分分为“不可检测”的A1和“稍有可辨”充填的A2。采用Fisher精确检验和McNemar检验进行统计分析（P = 0.05）。每组在12个月后均有1个修复体脱落（每组的保留率为95%）。12个月后，18个修复体呈现暗黄色趋势（颜色匹配A2）。在Filtek Z250修复体下使用Filtek流动树脂作为衬层，在评估6个月和12个月后并未改善Ⅴ类洞修复体的临床性能。
