Demirci Mustafa, Sancakli Hande Sar
Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Istanbul University, Capa, Istanbul 34390, Turkey.
Am J Dent. 2006 Feb;19(1):41-6.
To evaluate the 5-year clinical performance of Dyract in small Class I cavities in non stress-bearing areas.
On 36 patients, 87 restorations needing small cavity preparations were performed. The lesions were diagnosed macroscopically with a probe. They involved shallow fissures, and had reached dentin but the lateral spread was limited and localized in dentin. Cavities were designed to be on non stress bearing areas. Cavities' average facio-lingual width were prepared to be 1/3 or less than the intercuspal width. At baseline, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-year recalls, the restorations were evaluated according to the modified Ryge criteria by two calibrated, experienced examiners.
None of the restorations was lost and retention rate was 100% at the end of 1 year. After 2 years, one restoration (1.2%) had to be replaced due to caries lesion adjacent to its margin and the rate of retention was 98.8%. At the 3-year recall, four restorations, at the 4-year, one restoration and at the 5-year, one restoration had caries lesions adjacent to their margins and the cumulative retention rates were 94.2%, 92.9% and 91.5% respectively. Significant differences were detected between all of the evaluation periods in regard to color match rate (P = 0.00001), with the exception of rate between the baseline and 1 year evaluations. In regard to the marginal discoloration rates, there were statistically significant differences (P = 0.00001) between all of the evaluation periods with the exception of rates between the baseline and 1-year, 3- and 4-year, and 4- and 5-year results. Except for the failed restoration, no other restoration was clinically unacceptable in regard to color match, wear or loss of anatomic form, marginal discoloration, caries, marginal adaptation and surface texture.
评估Dyract材料在非受力区小I类洞中的5年临床性能。
对36例患者进行了87次需要制备小窝洞的修复治疗。用探针宏观诊断病变。病变包括浅沟裂，已累及牙本质，但侧向扩展有限且局限于牙本质。窝洞设计在非受力区。窝洞的平均颊舌宽度制备为牙尖间宽度的1/3或更小。在基线、1年、2年、3年、4年和5年复查时，由两名经过校准的经验丰富的检查者根据改良的Ryge标准对修复体进行评估。
1年后所有修复体均未脱落，保留率为100%。2年后，有1个修复体（1.2%）因边缘邻近龋损而需更换，保留率为98.8%。在3年复查时，有4个修复体，4年时有1个修复体，5年时有1个修复体边缘邻近龋损，累积保留率分别为94.2%、92.9%和91.5%。除基线与1年评估之间的比率外，所有评估期之间的颜色匹配率均检测到显著差异（P = 0.00001）。关于边缘变色率，除基线与1年、3年与4年以及4年与5年结果之间的比率外，所有评估期之间均存在统计学显著差异（P = 0.00001）。除失败的修复体外，没有其他修复体在颜色匹配、磨损或解剖形态丧失、边缘变色、龋齿、边缘适应性和表面质地方面临床上不可接受。
