Suppr超能文献

基于树脂的复合材料在后牙修复中的临床评估:12个月的结果。

Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: 12-month results.

作者信息

Celik Cigdem, Arhun Neslihan, Yamanel Kivanc

机构信息

Assistant Professor, Baskent University, School of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Eur J Dent. 2010 Jan;4(1):57-65.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the 12 month clinical performances of two different posterior composites in Class I and Class II restorations.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients (10 male, 21 female) were recruited into the study. A total of 82 Class I and Class II cavities were restored with either a nanohybrid composite (Grandio) or a low-shrinkage composite (Quixfil), using their self etch adhesives (Futura Bond and Xeno III) according to manufacturers' instructions. The restorations were clinically evaluated 1 week after placement as baseline, and after 6 and 12 months post-operatively using modified USPHS criteria by two previously calibrated operators. Statistical analysis were performed using Pearson Chi-square and Fisher's Exact Test (P<.05).

RESULTS

All patients attended the 12-month recall. Lack of retention was not observed in any of the restorations. With respect to color match, marginal adaptation, secondary caries and surface texture, no significant differences were found between two restorative materials tested after 12 months (P>.05). None of the restorations had marginal discoloration and anatomic form loss on the 12 month follow-up. Restorations did not exhibit post-operative sensitivity at any evaluation period.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical assessment of nanohybrid (Grandio) and low-shrinkage posterior composite (Quixfil) exhibited good clinical results with predominating alpha scores after 12 months. However; further evaluations are necessary for the long-term clinical performance of these materials.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估和比较两种不同的后牙复合树脂在Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类洞修复中的12个月临床性能。

方法

31名患者(10名男性,21名女性)被纳入本研究。根据制造商的说明,使用它们各自的自酸蚀粘结剂(Futura Bond和Xeno III),用纳米混合复合树脂(Grandio)或低收缩复合树脂(Quixfil)修复总共82个Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类洞。修复体在放置1周后作为基线进行临床评估,并在术后6个月和12个月由两名预先校准的操作人员使用改良的美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)标准进行评估。使用Pearson卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行统计分析(P<0.05)。

结果

所有患者均参加了12个月的回访。在任何修复体中均未观察到固位丧失。在颜色匹配、边缘适合性、继发龋和表面质地方面,12个月后测试的两种修复材料之间未发现显著差异(P>0.05)。在12个月的随访中,没有修复体出现边缘变色和外形丧失。在任何评估期,修复体均未表现出术后敏感。

结论

纳米混合复合树脂(Grandio)和低收缩后牙复合树脂(Quixfil)的临床评估在12个月后显示出良好的临床效果,主要为α级评分。然而,对于这些材料的长期临床性能,还需要进一步评估。

相似文献

2
Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.
Oper Dent. 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):397-404. doi: 10.2341/09-345-C.
3
Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: a 3-year study.
Med Princ Pract. 2014;23(5):453-9. doi: 10.1159/000364874. Epub 2014 Aug 12.
9
24-Month Clinical Evaluation of Different Bulk-Fill Restorative Resins in Class II Restorations.
Oper Dent. 2020 Mar/Apr;45(2):123-133. doi: 10.2341/18-144-C. Epub 2019 Nov 6.

引用本文的文献

5
Evaluation of Post-Operative Sensitivity of Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Nano Resin Composite: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study.
Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019 Jul 26;7(14):2335-2342. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.656. eCollection 2019 Jul 30.
8
Comparative Evaluation of shear Bond Strength of universal Dental Adhesives -An study.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Jul 1;9(7):e892-e896. doi: 10.4317/jced.53816. eCollection 2017 Jul.
10
Effect of operator variability on microleakage with different adhesive systems.
Eur J Dent. 2013 Sep;7(Suppl 1):S060-S065. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.119075.

本文引用的文献

1
Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: clinical results and margin analysis after four years.
Dent Mater. 2009 Jun;25(6):750-9. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.12.003. Epub 2009 Feb 23.
3
Three-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial of the posterior composite QuiXfil in class I and II cavities.
Clin Oral Investig. 2009 Sep;13(3):301-7. doi: 10.1007/s00784-008-0233-5. Epub 2008 Nov 8.
4
Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials.
Int Dent J. 2007 Oct;57(5):300-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2007.tb00136.x.
6
Clinical performance of a self-etch adhesive in Class V restorations made with and without acid etching.
J Dent. 2007 Jul;35(7):558-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.02.006. Epub 2007 Apr 27.
8
Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled composite in posterior teeth: 12-month results.
Oper Dent. 2006 Jul-Aug;31(4):409-17. doi: 10.2341/05-103.
9
Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: 2-year follow-up.
Clin Oral Investig. 2006 Sep;10(3):197-203. doi: 10.1007/s00784-006-0059-y. Epub 2006 Jul 6.
10
3-Year clinical evaluation of posterior packable composite resin restorations.
J Oral Rehabil. 2006 Feb;33(2):144-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01539.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验