Doctor and Research Assistant, Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Technology, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Research Assistant, Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology (IMBE) Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Sep;118(3):347-352. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.020. Epub 2017 Feb 20.
Different luting materials are available for the cementation of fixed dental prostheses. Postcementation hypersensitivity is an occasional complication in the definitive delivery. How the choice of luting agent affects long-term postcementation sensitivity is unknown.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial was to compare the hypersensitivity of 2 cementation methods for metal-ceramic crowns. The primary endpoint was the evaluation of differences in hypersensitivity between the study groups over a study period of 5 years.
The study investigated 20 participants with 40 metal-ceramic crowns cemented with either zinc phosphate cement or a self-adhesive resin cement, each in nonantagonistic contralateral quadrants (observation period of 5 years). The data regarding postcementation hypersensitivity included continuous patient-related outcome variables assessed using a visual analog scale (sign test; primary endpoint, level of significance α/3=.0167; secondary endpoint, level of significance, α=.05) and categorical variables represented by yes/no replies (absolute and relative frequencies). The sensitivity of teeth was controlled in relation to mastication, air streams, and hot and cold temperatures.
The observation period was 5 years, with a dropout rate of 12.5% in the last 2 years. The results indicated no significant differences between the cement groups for patient- and clinical-related outcomes at any of the observed time points.
As no differences were found between the 2 different cementation modes with respect to developing hypersensitivity after 5 years, the choice of a luting agent remains an individual practitioner decision.
有不同的粘固材料可用于固定义齿修复体的粘固。粘固后过敏是最终交付时偶尔出现的并发症。粘固剂的选择如何影响长期粘固后过敏尚不清楚。
本前瞻性、随机、对照、分侧临床研究的目的是比较 2 种用于金属烤瓷冠粘固的方法的过敏情况。主要终点是评估研究组在 5 年研究期间过敏之间的差异。
该研究调查了 20 名参与者的 40 颗金属烤瓷冠,分别用磷酸锌水门汀或自粘接树脂水门汀粘固,每颗位于非拮抗的对侧象限(观察期 5 年)。关于粘固后过敏的数据包括使用视觉模拟量表(符号检验;主要终点,显著性水平α/3=.0167;次要终点,显著性水平α=.05)评估的连续患者相关结局变量以及以是/否回答表示的分类变量(绝对和相对频率)。牙齿的敏感性与咀嚼、气流、冷热温度有关。
观察期为 5 年,最后 2 年的失访率为 12.5%。结果表明,在任何观察时间点,粘固组在患者和临床相关结局方面均无显著差异。
由于在 5 年后,两种不同粘固方式在发生过敏方面没有差异,因此粘固剂的选择仍然是个人医生的决定。