Hickel R, Voss A
Dtsch Zahnarztl Z. 1989 Jan;44(1):59-62.
54 three-unit maxillary anterior bridges with retention meshes were bonded under standardized and, as far as possible, identical clinical conditions using different adhesive systems: Super Bond, a 4-Meta-PMMA resin, and ABC (Adhesive Bridge Cement) and Microfill pontic, both composite adhesives. The restorations were re-evaluated after 5.3 years, at most. Both types of adhesive systems could be tested by contralateral comparison of 10 pairs of bonded bridges. After a mean period of 2.9 years of wear primary failures were observed in 8 out of 54 bonded bridges (approximately 15%). Under the conditions given in this study the failure rates of the composite adhesives and the 4-Meta-PMMA resin were identical after approximately 3 years.
54个带有固位网的上颌前牙三单位桥在标准化且尽可能相同的临床条件下，使用不同的粘结系统进行粘结：Super Bond（一种4-甲基丙烯酸甲酯-聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯树脂）、ABC（粘结桥用水泥）以及Microfill桥体（两者均为复合粘结剂）。修复体最多在5.3年后进行重新评估。两种粘结系统均可通过对10对粘结桥进行对侧比较来测试。经过平均2.9年的磨损后，在54个粘结桥中有8个观察到原发性失败（约15%）。在本研究给定的条件下，复合粘结剂和4-甲基丙烯酸甲酯-聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯树脂的失败率在大约3年后相同。
