Bryant R W, Hodge K L
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sydney.
Aust Dent J. 1994 Apr;39(2):77-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1994.tb01377.x.
There is a trend towards manufacturers seeking to provide dentists with a single, all-purpose composite resin, usually of the small particle hybrid type. This three-year clinical study compared the clinical performance of three different types of composite resin used in posterior teeth and identified several modes of failure. Of the 330 restorations (three composite resins and one amalgam control) initially placed in 72 patients, 223 restorations in 48 patients were available for evaluation at three years. Modified clinical criteria for assessing the restorations were able to discriminate among the composite resins. A microfilled composite and a small particle hybrid exhibited increasing evidence of marginal fracture (crevice) with time. In addition, the small particle hybrid showed evidence of wear at the margins more frequently than the other materials. Of the restorations available for assessment, four restorations of each of these two types of composite resin required replacement during the study. Coarse particle hybrid restorations showed evidence of wear but little evidence of marginal fracture.
制造商有一种趋势，即寻求为牙医提供单一的、通用的复合树脂，通常是小颗粒混合类型。这项为期三年的临床研究比较了三种不同类型的复合树脂在后牙的临床性能，并确定了几种失败模式。在最初为72名患者放置的330个修复体（三种复合树脂和一种汞合金对照）中，48名患者的223个修复体在三年时可供评估。用于评估修复体的改良临床标准能够区分复合树脂。一种微填料复合树脂和一种小颗粒混合复合树脂随着时间的推移出现边缘骨折（缝隙）的迹象越来越多。此外，小颗粒混合复合树脂比其他材料更频繁地出现边缘磨损迹象。在可供评估的修复体中，这两种类型的复合树脂在研究期间各有四个修复体需要更换。粗颗粒混合复合树脂显示出磨损迹象，但边缘骨折迹象很少。
