1年后，采用自粘树脂水门汀粘结的IPS Empress嵌体。
IPS Empress inlays luted with a self-adhesive resin cement after 1 year.
作者信息
Taschner Michael, Frankenberger Roland, García-Godoy Franklin, Rosenbusch Silke, Petschelt Anselm, Krämer Norbert
机构信息
Dental Clinic 1-Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Medical Center Erlangen, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Glueckstrasse 11, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany.
出版信息
Am J Dent. 2009 Feb;22(1):55-9.
PURPOSE
To prospectively compare the clinical performance of two different resin composites for luting IPS Empress inlays and onlays.
METHODS
83 IPS Empress restorations were placed in 30 subjects. All restorations were inserted under rubber dam. 43 inlays/onlays were luted with a self-adhesive resin cement [RelyX Unicem (RX)]. A multistep adhesive (Syntac) was used with Variolink II low viscosity (SV) and served as control (n=40). The restorations were evaluated after 2 weeks: Baseline = 1st recall (R1), after 6 months (R2) and after 1 year (R3) by two calibrated examiners using the modified USPHS criteria.
RESULTS
From R1 to R3, one failure was noticed in the SV group (R2) due to marginal enamel chipping. After 1 year of clinical service, SV revealed significantly better results regarding color match and integrity inlay (Mann-Whitney U-test, P< 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed between SV and RX for the remaining criteria (Mann-Whitney U-test, P>0.05).
目的
前瞻性比较两种不同树脂复合材料用于粘结IPS Empress嵌体和高嵌体的临床性能。
方法
在30名受试者中放置了83个IPS Empress修复体。所有修复体均在橡皮障下就位。43个嵌体/高嵌体用自粘结树脂水门汀[RelyX Unicem（RX）]粘结。一种多步骤粘结剂（Syntac）与Variolink II低粘度粘结剂（SV）一起使用，并作为对照（n = 40）。在2周后对修复体进行评估：基线=第一次复诊（R1），6个月后（R2）和1年后（R3），由两名经过校准的检查者使用改良的美国公共卫生署（USPHS）标准进行评估。
结果
从R1到R3，SV组在R2时出现1例失败，原因是边缘釉质崩裂。临床使用1年后，SV在颜色匹配和嵌体完整性方面显示出明显更好的结果（曼-惠特尼U检验，P < 0.05）。对于其余标准，SV和RX之间未观察到统计学上的显著差异（曼-惠特尼U检验，P> 0.05）。
Zotero 插件