Suppr超能文献

树脂基复合材料在后牙修复中的临床评估:一项为期3年的研究。

Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: a 3-year study.

作者信息

Çelik Çiğdem, Arhun Neslihan, Yamanel Kivanc

机构信息

Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Med Princ Pract. 2014;23(5):453-9. doi: 10.1159/000364874. Epub 2014 Aug 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a nanohybrid and a microhybrid composite in class I and II restorations after 3 years.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A total of 82 class I and class II restorations were performed in 31 patients (10 males and 21 females) using Grandio and QuiXfil with self-etch adhesives (Futurabond and Xeno III). The restorations were clinically evaluated by 2 operators 1 week after placement (baseline) and at 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. At the 3-year follow-up, 62 class I and class II cavities were reevaluated in 23 patients (7 males and 16 females). Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's χ(2) and Fisher's exact tests (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

At the 6-month follow-up, all restorations received Alfa scores with respect to each evaluation criterion. At the 1-year follow-up, 2 QuiXfil restorations had to be replaced and Grandio restorations started to deteriorate in terms of marginal adaptation. At the end of 2 years, 9 Grandio restorations showed significant deterioration of the surface properties, demonstrating Bravo scores. At the end of 3 years, no significant differences were observed regarding color match, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, marginal discoloration, and anatomic form loss between the evaluated materials in 25 class I and 37 class II restorations. At the 3-year follow-up, Grandio restorations had 21% Bravo scores and showed significant deterioration of the surface properties, which were still clinically acceptable according to USPHS criteria. Three QuiXfil and 1 Grandio restorations were replaced because of secondary caries and loss of retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the nanohybrid (Grandio) and the microhybrid (QuiXfil) composites were clinically functional after 3 years.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估纳米混合复合树脂和微混合复合树脂在Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类洞修复3年后的临床性能。

对象与方法

使用Grandio和QuiXfil复合树脂及自酸蚀粘结剂(Futurabond和Xeno III),对31例患者(10例男性和21例女性)共进行了82颗Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类洞修复。修复后1周(基线)、6个月、1年、2年和3年,由2名操作人员按照改良的美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)标准进行临床评估。在3年随访时,对23例患者(7例男性和16例女性)的62颗Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类洞进行了重新评估。采用Pearson卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行统计学分析(p < 0.05)。

结果

在6个月随访时,所有修复体在各项评估标准下均获得Alfa评分。在1年随访时,2颗QuiXfil修复体需要更换,Grandio修复体在边缘适应性方面开始变差。在2年结束时,9颗Grandio修复体表面性能出现明显恶化,表现为Bravo评分。在3年结束时,在25颗Ⅰ类和37颗Ⅱ类修复体中,评估的材料在颜色匹配、边缘适应性、继发龋、边缘变色和外形丧失方面未观察到显著差异。在3年随访时,Grandio修复体有21%为Bravo评分,表面性能出现明显恶化,但根据USPHS标准在临床上仍可接受。3颗QuiXfil和1颗Grandio修复体因继发龋和固位丧失而被更换。

结论

纳米混合复合树脂(Grandio)和微混合复合树脂(QuiXfil)在3年后临床功能均良好。

相似文献

1
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.
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.
8
A split-mouth randomized clinical trial of conventional and heavy flowable composites in class II restorations.
J Dent. 2014 Jul;42(7):793-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.04.009. Epub 2014 Apr 25.
9
Five-year Clinical Evaluation of a Nanofilled and a Nanohybrid Composite in Class IV Cavities.
Oper Dent. 2018 May/Jun;43(3):261-271. doi: 10.2341/16-358-C. Epub 2018 Mar 13.

引用本文的文献

3
Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology.
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):41-64. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04198-8. Epub 2021 Sep 30.
4
A three-year randomized clinical trial evaluating direct posterior composite restorations placed with three self-etch adhesives.
Biomater Investig Dent. 2021 Jun 25;8(1):92-103. doi: 10.1080/26415275.2021.1939034. eCollection 2021.
5
Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light.
Clin Oral Investig. 2018 May;22(4):1651-1662. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2226-8. Epub 2017 Oct 28.
6
Four-year outcomes of restored posterior tooth surfaces-a massive data analysis.
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Dec;21(9):2819-2825. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2084-4. Epub 2017 Feb 28.
7
Applications of Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation (Lasers) for Restorative Dentistry.
Med Princ Pract. 2016;25(3):201-11. doi: 10.1159/000443144. Epub 2015 Dec 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials.
Dent Mater. 2012 Jan;28(1):87-101. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003.
2
Two year clinical evaluation of a low-shrink resin composite material in UK general dental practices.
Dent Mater. 2011 Jul;27(7):622-30. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.02.012. Epub 2011 Apr 22.
3
Clinical evaluation of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students of Kuwait University.
Med Princ Pract. 2010;19(4):299-304. doi: 10.1159/000312717. Epub 2010 May 26.
5
Surface roughness and morphology of three nanocomposites after two different polishing treatments by a multitechnique approach.
Dent Mater. 2010 May;26(5):416-25. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.09.014. Epub 2010 Jan 25.
7
Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load.
Dent Mater. 2010 Apr;26(4):306-19. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.152. Epub 2009 Dec 29.
9
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.
10
An eight-year clinical evaluation of filled and unfilled one-bottle dental adhesives.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2009 Jan;140(1):28-37; quiz 111-2. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0015.

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