Suppr超能文献

后牙直接纳米复合树脂和间接复合树脂修复体的五年临床评估。

A five-year clinical evaluation of direct nanofilled and indirect composite resin restorations in posterior teeth.

机构信息

Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.

出版信息

Oper Dent. 2013 Mar-Apr;38(2):E1-11. doi: 10.2341/12-160-C. Epub 2012 Dec 5.

Abstract

AIM

To assess the clinical efficacy of posterior composite resin restorations placed directly and indirectly in posterior teeth after five years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 108 cavities in 54 patients were restored with three direct composite resins (Filtek SupremeXT [FSXT], Tetric Evo Ceram [TEC], AELITE Aesthetic [AA]) and two indirect composite resins (Estenia [E] and Tescera ATL [TATL]). All restorations were evaluated by two examiners using the United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline and five years after placement. Statistical analysis was completed with Fisher exact and McNemar χ(2) tests.

RESULTS

At baseline, 4% (five) of the restored teeth presented postoperative sensitivity; however, only one of them (a member of the E group) required canal treatment and replacement after two years. At the five-year evaluation, all restorations were retained, with Alpha ratings at 100%. Only one tooth (in the TEC group) required replacement after three years due to secondary caries. Color match, surface texture, and marginal integrity were predominantly scored as Alpha after five years for all groups. After that time, marginal discoloration was scored as Alpha in 64% of AE restorations, 70% of TATL restorations, 73% of E restorations, and 87% of FSXT restorations. There were no Charlie scores recorded for any of the restorative systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Under controlled clinical conditions, indirect composite resin inlays and direct composite resin restorations exhibited an annual failure rate of 2.5% and 1.6%, respectively, after five years. Therefore, the investigated materials showed acceptable clinical performance, and no significant differences were found among them.

摘要

目的

评估五年后后牙直接和间接复合树脂修复体的临床疗效。

材料和方法

54 名患者的 108 个窝洞分别用三种直接复合树脂(Filtek SupremeXT [FSXT]、Tetric Evo Ceram [TEC]、AELITE Aesthetic [AA])和两种间接复合树脂(Estenia [E]和 Tescera ATL [TATL])进行修复。所有修复体均由两名检查者在基线和放置五年后使用美国公共卫生服务标准进行评估。统计分析采用 Fisher 确切检验和 McNemar χ(2)检验。

结果

基线时,4%(五颗)的修复牙出现术后敏感,但其中只有一颗(E 组)在两年后需要根管治疗和更换。在五年评估时,所有修复体均保留,Alpha 评分为 100%。只有一颗牙(TEC 组)在三年后因继发龋需要更换。五年后,所有组的颜色匹配、表面质地和边缘完整性均主要评为 Alpha。此后,64%的 AE 修复体、70%的 TATL 修复体、73%的 E 修复体和 87%的 FSXT 修复体的边缘变色评为 Alpha。任何修复系统均未记录到 Charlie 评分。

结论

在控制临床条件下,间接复合树脂嵌体和直接复合树脂修复体在五年后的年失败率分别为 2.5%和 1.6%。因此,所研究的材料表现出可接受的临床性能,且它们之间没有发现显著差异。

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