Yu Wei-Qiang, Yu Miao, Yao Li-Li, Wang Chun-Hong, Wang Mian, Fan Cong
Department of Prosthodontics, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine. Shanghai 200011, China. E-mail:
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2018 Feb;27(1):61-64.
To compare the clinical efficacy of CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlay and polymerid porcelain inlay in restoring Class II cavity of posterior teeth.
Ninety-seven patients with 100 posterior teeth of ClassII cavity were recruited in this randomized control trial; Among them, 50 patients were grouped into CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlays and 47 patients were grouped into Ceramage polymerid porcelain inlay. According to the modified USPHS criteria, the incidence of postoperative sensitivity, prosthesis fracture, prosthesis falling off, and edge coloration were evaluated 12 months and 24 months after restoration. Chi-square test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used for statistical analysis using SPSS 13.0 software package.
Restoration in the 2 groups were successful, there was no significant difference at 12 months (P>0.05). Postoperative sensitivity and the incidence of prosthesis falling off in both groups were not significantly different (P>0.05); however, the number of prosthesis fracture of the polymerid porcelain was lower than that of the CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlays (P<0.05). The incidence of edge coloration of CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlays was lower than that of the polymerid porcelain at 24-month follow-up (P<0.05).
Restoration with polymerid porcelain is more likely to have a higher success rate than those with CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlays. Patients undergoing CAD/CAM all-ceramic inlays have a lower incidence of edge coloration, compared with those undergoing polymerid porcelain.
比较CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体与聚合瓷嵌体修复后牙Ⅱ类洞的临床疗效。
本随机对照试验纳入97例患者共100颗后牙Ⅱ类洞;其中,50例患者被分组接受CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体修复,47例患者被分组接受聚合瓷嵌体修复。根据改良的美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)标准,在修复后12个月和24个月评估术后敏感、修复体折断、修复体脱落及边缘着色的发生率。使用SPSS 13.0软件包进行卡方检验和Wilcoxon秩和检验以进行统计分析。
两组修复均成功,12个月时差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组术后敏感及修复体脱落发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);然而,聚合瓷修复体折断数量低于CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体(P<0.05)。在24个月随访时,CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体边缘着色发生率低于聚合瓷(P<0.05)。
聚合瓷修复的成功率可能高于CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体修复。与接受聚合瓷修复的患者相比,接受CAD/CAM全瓷嵌体修复的患者边缘着色发生率更低。