Yılmaz Kerem, Aydın Hakan, Gönüldaş Fehmi, Kara Sukan, Çiloğlu Özge, Özdemir Erdem, Bilen Zeynep
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, Bilimdent Oral and Dental Health Center, Antalya 07040, Turkey.
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, Bilimdent Oral and Dental Health Center, Antalya 07040, Turkey.
Materials (Basel). 2025 May 6;18(9):2137. doi: 10.3390/ma18092137.
The aim of this innovative study was to investigate the feasibility of a modified butt joint preparation with two grooves instead of a ferrule when root dentin tissue is limited in mandibular molars. It was also investigated to what extent the effect of these treatment options on marginal and internal fit and fracture strength (FS) varied according to the type of material and whether or not a fiber ribbon was used at the base. Marginal and internal fit were evaluated using the triple-scan protocol. Statistical analysis was conducted via a three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD), marginal discrepancy, and overall fit values for the ceramic group were 127 μm, 108 μm, and 120 μm, respectively, while corresponding values for the hybrid ceramic group were 139 μm, 116 μm, and 130 μm ( < 0.05). The mean FS recorded for ceramic restorations was 662 N, whereas hybrid ceramic restorations demonstrated a significantly higher FS of 903 N ( < 0.001). When material type was assessed independently of preparation design and base configuration, both ceramic and hybrid ceramic exceeded the predefined clinical acceptability threshold for AMD; however, they remained within acceptable limits for the remaining parameters. Among the evaluated configurations, hybrid ceramic restorations incorporating ferrules and fiber-reinforced bases exhibited the highest FS values, whereas ceramic restorations with modified biological widths and lacking fiber reinforcement yielded the lowest FS values.
这项创新性研究的目的是，当下颌磨牙的牙根牙本质组织有限时，研究采用两条沟而非金属箍的改良对接预备方式的可行性。同时还研究了这些治疗方案对边缘密合度、内部适合性和抗折强度（FS）的影响在何种程度上会因材料类型以及底部是否使用纤维带而有所不同。采用三重扫描方案评估边缘密合度和内部适合性。通过三因素方差分析（ANOVA）进行统计分析。陶瓷组的绝对边缘差异（AMD）、边缘差异和整体适合性值分别为127μm、108μm和120μm，而混合陶瓷组的相应值分别为139μm、116μm和130μm（P<0.05）。陶瓷修复体的平均抗折强度记录为662N，而混合陶瓷修复体的抗折强度显著更高，为903N（P<0.001）。当独立于预备设计和底部结构评估材料类型时，陶瓷和混合陶瓷的AMD均超过了预先定义的临床可接受阈值；然而，它们在其余参数方面仍处于可接受范围内。在评估的结构中，采用金属箍和纤维增强底部的混合陶瓷修复体表现出最高的抗折强度值，而具有改良生物学宽度且缺乏纤维增强的陶瓷修复体产生了最低的抗折强度值。
