Suppr超能文献

一项评价高黏玻璃离子水门汀修复非龋性颈缘缺损临床性能的随机、对照、分口研究:两年结果。

A Randomized, Controlled, Split-mouth Trial Evaluating the Clinical Performance of High-viscosity Glass-ionomer Restorations in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: Two-year Results.

出版信息

J Adhes Dent. 2018;20(4):299-305. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a40985.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the two-year clinical performance of high-viscosity glass ionomer (Hv-GIC) restorations in noncarious cervical lesions with nanohybrid composite restorations applied with a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (E&Ra/nanoC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred thirty-four noncarious cervical lesions were included and assigned to two groups according to the split-mouth design. The cervical lesions in the experimental group were restored with an Hv-GIC (Equia, GC), while a nanohybrid composite (G-aenial, GC) with a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Optibond FL, Kerr) was applied as the control. All tested restorative materials were used according to the manufacturers' instructions. Clinical evaluation was performed after one week, six months, one year, and two years using World Dental Federation criteria. Data were analyzed using Friedman's ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-tests (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

After two years, Hv-GIC restorations had a retention rate of 91% in comparison to 100% for E&Ra/nanoC restorations. Significant differences existed between the two restorative materials solely with respect to the retention parameter after two years (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The two-year clinical performance of Hv-GIC was clinically acceptable. However, the retention of E&Ra/nanoC restorations was significantly better than that of Hv-GIC restorations after two years.

摘要

目的

比较高粘度玻璃离子水门汀(Hv-GIC)修复非龋性颈壁缺损的两年临床效果与三步酸蚀-冲洗粘结(E&Ra/nanoC)复合纳米树脂的临床效果。

材料和方法

共纳入 134 例非龋性颈壁缺损患者,采用分口设计将其分为两组。实验组的颈壁缺损用 Hv-GIC(GC 公司的 Equia)修复,对照组用纳米复合树脂(GC 公司的 G-aenial)与三步酸蚀-冲洗粘结剂(Kerr 公司的 Optibond FL)修复。所有测试的修复材料均按厂家说明使用。采用世界牙科联盟标准,分别于治疗后 1 周、6 个月、1 年和 2 年进行临床评价。采用 Friedman ANOVA 和 Mann-Whitney U 检验(α=0.05)对数据进行分析。

结果

两年后,Hv-GIC 修复体的保留率为 91%,而 E&Ra/nanoC 修复体的保留率为 100%。两种修复材料在仅保留参数方面存在显著差异,主要表现在两年后(p=0.008)。

结论

Hv-GIC 修复体在两年的临床应用中效果良好,但两年后 E&Ra/nanoC 修复体的保留率明显优于 Hv-GIC 修复体。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验