Suppr超能文献

牙釉质发育不全患者的直接后牙复合树脂修复的临床性能。

Clinical Performance of Direct Posterior Composite Restorations in Patients with Amelogenesis Imperfecta.

机构信息

*Neslihan Tekçe, DDS, PhD, associate professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry,University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli, Turkey.

Mustafa Demirci, DDS, PhD, professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Oper Dent. 2022 Nov 1;47(6):620-629. doi: 10.2341/21-106-C.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to analyze and assess the clinical performance of direct composite restorations using a nanohybrid and a nanofill composite material for posterior teeth in patients with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI). This study involved 15 patients between the ages of 14 and 30 years suffering from amelogenesis imperfecta (AI). During the study, the patients received direct composite restorations using either the Clearfil Majesty ES-2 (Kuraray Medical Inc, Tokyo, Japan) and Clearfil Universal Bond (Kuraray) or Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) and Single Bond Universal Adhesive (3M ESPE). The evaluations of the restorations were conducted per the modified USPHS criteria at the time of baseline as well as during the first-, second-, third-, and fourth-year follow-up sessions. After four years, it was observed that the cumulative success rate of direct posterior restorations was 98.1% for Clearfil Majesty ES-2 and 92.2% for Filtek Ultimate. During the study one Clearfil Majesty ES-2 restoration and four Filtek Ultimate restorations failed. There was a significant difference between Clearfil Majesty ES-2 and Filtek Ultimate in the color match in posterior restorations after three and four years. The causes of failure included marginal discoloration and caries, as well as fracture of the restoration. Hence, it can be stated that the use of nanohybrid or nanofill composites in posterior direct restorations in patients with AI looks promising. The failure rate of Clearfil Majesty ES-2 was found to be lower than that of Filtek Ultimate restorations. Clinically, the rate of optimum restorations conducted for partial discoloration, marginal adaptation, color match, and surface texture were observed to be higher when Clearfil Majesty ES-2 was used. However, additional studies are needed to assess the clinical performance of direct posterior composite materials in patients with AI.

摘要

本研究旨在分析和评估使用纳米混合和纳米填充复合材料对釉质发育不全(AI)患者后牙进行直接复合修复的临床效果。本研究纳入了 15 名年龄在 14 岁至 30 岁之间的釉质发育不全患者。在研究过程中,患者接受了直接复合修复,使用的材料分别为 Clearfil Majesty ES-2(Kuraray Medical Inc,Tokyo,Japan)和 Clearfil Universal Bond(Kuraray),或 Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative(3M ESPE,St Paul,MN,USA)和 Single Bond Universal Adhesive(3M ESPE)。在基线时以及第一年、第二年、第三年和第四年随访时,根据改良的美国公共卫生服务标准对修复体进行评估。四年后,Clearfil Majesty ES-2 的直接后牙修复体累积成功率为 98.1%,Filtek Ultimate 为 92.2%。在研究过程中,有一个 Clearfil Majesty ES-2 修复体和四个 Filtek Ultimate 修复体失败。Clearfil Majesty ES-2 和 Filtek Ultimate 在第三年和第四年后牙修复体的颜色匹配方面存在显著差异。失败的原因包括边缘变色和龋齿,以及修复体破裂。因此,可以说在 AI 患者的后牙直接修复中使用纳米混合或纳米填充复合材料具有良好的前景。Clearfil Majesty ES-2 的失败率低于 Filtek Ultimate 修复体。临床观察发现,在进行部分变色、边缘适应性、颜色匹配和表面纹理优化修复时,使用 Clearfil Majesty ES-2 的成功率更高。然而,需要进一步的研究来评估 AI 患者后牙直接复合材料的临床性能。

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