Smales R J
University of Adelaide, South Australia.
Am J Dent. 1991 Jun;4(3):130-3.
This study examined the survival of an anterior composite resin placed with or without enamel acid-etching using a low viscosity enamel bonding resin, for periods of approximately 16 years. The 950 conventional composite resin restorations were placed by numerous students and dentists for patients attending a dental hospital. Restorative failures were assessed using the life table method and specifically evaluated the placement method, type of restoration, patient age, and the dentist. There were no significant statistical differences between the two placement methods, or the two university and hospital dentist groups. However, there were significantly more failures with the Class IV restorations and in the oldest patient group. The enamel acid-etching and an enamel bonding resin did not display an advantage over unetched cavity preparations. The median survival for both methods of composite resin placement was 8-9 years.
本研究使用低粘度釉质粘结树脂,对有或没有进行釉质酸蚀处理的前牙复合树脂进行了约16年的留存情况研究。950颗传统复合树脂修复体由众多学生和牙医为就诊于一家牙科医院的患者进行放置。使用寿命表法评估修复失败情况,并特别评估了放置方法、修复类型、患者年龄和牙医。两种放置方法之间,以及两所大学和医院的牙医组之间均无显著统计学差异。然而,IV类修复体以及最年长患者组中的失败情况明显更多。釉质酸蚀处理和釉质粘结树脂相比未酸蚀的窝洞预备并未显示出优势。两种复合树脂放置方法的中位留存时间均为8至9年。