R&D, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein.
Dent Mater. 2012 Sep;28(9):961-73. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.006. Epub 2012 Jun 13.
We examined the correlation between clinical wear rates of restorative materials and enamel (TRAC Research Foundation, Provo, USA) and the results of six laboratory test methods (ACTA, Alabama (generalized, localized), Ivoclar (vertical, volumetric), Munich, OHSU (abrasion, attrition), Zurich).
Individual clinical wear data were available from clinical trials that were conducted by TRAC Research Foundation (formerly CRA) together with general practitioners. For each of the n=28 materials (21 composite resins for intra-coronal restorations [20 direct and 1 indirect], 5 resin materials for crowns, 1 amalgam, enamel) a minimum of 30 restorations had been placed in posterior teeth, mainly molars. The recall intervals were up to 5 years with the majority of materials (n=27) being monitored, however, only for up to 2 years. For the laboratory data, the databases MEDLINE and IADR abstracts were searched for wear data on materials which were also clinically tested by TRAC Research Foundation. Only those data for which the same test parameters (e.g. number of cycles, loading force, type of antagonist) had been published were included in the study. A different quantity of data was available for each laboratory method: Ivoclar (n=22), Zurich (n=20), Alabama (n=17), OHSU and ACTA (n=12), Munich (n=7). The clinical results were summed up in an index and a linear mixed model was fitted to the log wear measurements including the following factors: material, time (0.5, 1, 2 and 3 years), tooth (premolar/molar) and gender (male/female) as fixed effects, and patient as random effect. Relative ranks were created for each material and method; the same was performed with the clinical results.
The mean age of the subjects was 40 (±12) years. The materials had been mostly applied in molars (81%) and 95% of the intracoronal restorations were Class II restorations. The mean number of individual wear data per material was 25 (range 14-42). The mean coefficient of variation of clinical wear data was 53%. The only significant correlation was reached by OHSU (abrasion) with a Spearman r of 0.86 (p=0.001). Zurich, ACTA, Alabama generalized wear and Ivoclar (volume) had correlation coefficients between 0.3 and 0.4. For Zurich, Alabama generalized wear and Munich, the correlation coefficient improved if only composites for direct use were taken into consideration. The combination of different laboratory methods did not significantly improve the correlation.
The clinical wear of composite resins is mainly dependent on differences between patients and less on the differences between materials. Laboratory methods to test conventional resins for wear are therefore less important, especially since most of them do not reflect the clinical wear.
我们研究了修复材料与牙釉质的临床磨损率(TRAC 研究基金会,美国普罗沃)之间的相关性,以及六种实验室测试方法(ACTA、阿拉巴马州(广义的、局部的)、Ivoclar(垂直的、体积的)、慕尼黑、OHSU(磨损、损耗)、苏黎世)的结果。
临床试验的个体临床磨损数据可从 TRAC 研究基金会(前身为 CRA)与普通从业者一起进行的临床试验中获得。对于 n=28 种材料(21 种用于牙内修复的复合树脂[20 种直接和 1 种间接]、5 种用于牙冠的树脂材料、1 种汞合金、牙釉质),至少有 30 种修复体被放置在后牙中,主要是磨牙。召回间隔最长可达 5 年,其中大多数材料(n=27)被监测,但最多只监测了 2 年。对于实验室数据,在 MEDLINE 和 IADR 摘要数据库中搜索了 TRAC 研究基金会也进行过临床测试的材料的磨损数据。仅包括已发表的相同测试参数(例如,循环次数、加载力、对颌类型)的数据。每个实验室方法可用的数据量不同:Ivoclar(n=22)、苏黎世(n=20)、阿拉巴马州(n=17)、OHSU 和 ACTA(n=12)、慕尼黑(n=7)。临床结果总结为一个指数,并对包括以下因素的对数磨损测量值拟合线性混合模型:材料、时间(0.5、1、2 和 3 年)、牙齿(前磨牙/磨牙)和性别(男性/女性)作为固定效应,患者作为随机效应。为每个材料和方法创建了相对等级;临床结果也进行了相同的处理。
受试者的平均年龄为 40(±12)岁。这些材料主要应用于磨牙(81%),95%的牙内修复体为 II 类修复体。每种材料的个体磨损数据平均数量为 25(范围为 14-42)。临床磨损数据的变异系数平均值为 53%。唯一达到显著相关性的是 OHSU(磨损),Spearman r 为 0.86(p=0.001)。苏黎世、ACTA、阿拉巴马州广义磨损和 Ivoclar(体积)的相关系数在 0.3 到 0.4 之间。对于苏黎世、阿拉巴马州广义磨损和慕尼黑,仅考虑直接使用的复合材料时,相关系数会有所提高。组合使用不同的实验室方法并不能显著提高相关性。
复合树脂的临床磨损主要取决于患者之间的差异,而材料之间的差异则较小。因此,用于测试传统树脂磨损的实验室方法不太重要,特别是因为它们大多数都不能反映临床磨损。