• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

六种不同后牙复合树脂的Ⅱ类修复体:五年随访结果

Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results.

作者信息

Rasmusson C G, Lundin S A

机构信息

Public Dental Health Services, Orebro County Council.

出版信息

Swed Dent J. 1995;19(5):173-82.

PMID:8614898
Abstract

Class II restorations of six light cured posterior composite resin materials (the intermediates Occlusin, P 30, Fulfil, Profile and the microfine Heliomolar and Distalite) were followed for five years. The results from three years have been reported earlier (Lundin et al 1990). At baseline twenty-four dentists from seven different clinics of the Public Dental Health Services in the country of Bohuslän placed 247 Class II restorations on 213 patients of the ordinary clientele visiting the clinics. Before starting the operators were instructed and trained in performing the restorations according to a standardized clinical procedure. The restorations were evaluated, according to a specially designed assessment form using the USPHS criteria, after one week, three years and five years. Stone casts were used to quantitatively categorize the occlusal wear according to the Leinfelder method. After five years the failure rate (USPHS rating Charlie) was 27 restorations out of assessed 176, i.e. 15%. The most common reason for failure was secondary caries. Fulfil had the highest failure rate among the intermediate materials (Chi-Square, p < 0.05). Assessment of wear showed that Profile, compared to the other intermediate materials, had worn the most and the two microfine materials Heliomolar and Distalite, compared to all the intermediate materials had worn the least. This study confirms the results from three years, that clinically acceptable results can be obtained with posterior composite resin materials when used in a proper and scheduled manner.

摘要

对六种光固化后牙复合树脂材料(中等粒度的Occlusin、P 30、Fulfil、Profile以及超微填料的Heliomolar和Distalite)的II类修复体进行了为期五年的跟踪研究。三年的研究结果已在之前报道过(Lundin等人,1990年)。在基线阶段,来自瑞典布胡斯省公共牙科保健服务机构七个不同诊所的24名牙医,为前来就诊的213名普通患者进行了247例II类修复。在开始操作前,操作人员按照标准化临床程序接受了修复操作的指导和培训。根据专门设计的评估表格,使用美国公共卫生服务部(USPHS)标准,在术后一周、三年和五年对修复体进行评估。使用石膏模型,根据莱因费尔德方法对咬合磨损进行定量分类。五年后,在评估的176例修复体中,失败率(USPHS评级为C级)为27例,即15%。最常见的失败原因是继发龋。在中等粒度材料中,Fulfil的失败率最高(卡方检验,p < 0.05)。磨损评估显示,与其他中等粒度材料相比,Profile的磨损最多,而两种超微填料材料Heliomolar和Distalite与所有中等粒度材料相比,磨损最少。本研究证实了三年的研究结果,即后牙复合树脂材料以适当且有计划的方式使用时,可获得临床上可接受的结果。

相似文献

1
Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results.六种不同后牙复合树脂的Ⅱ类修复体:五年随访结果
Swed Dent J. 1995;19(5):173-82.
2
Class II composite resin restorations: a three-year clinical study of six different posterior composites.II类复合树脂修复体:六种不同后牙复合树脂的三年临床研究
Swed Dent J. 1990;14(3):105-14.
3
Class I and II composite resin restorations: 4-year clinical follow up.I类和II类复合树脂修复体:4年临床随访
Swed Dent J. 1989;13(6):217-27.
4
Clinical evaluation of a resin composite and bonding agent in Class I and II restorations: 2-year results.I类和II类修复中树脂复合材料和粘结剂的临床评估:2年结果
Quintessence Int. 2004 Oct;35(9):758-62.
5
Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.乳牙复合树脂和复合体修复体的临床评估:24个月结果
J Dent. 2006 Jul;34(6):381-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.08.003. Epub 2005 Oct 18.
6
Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations.后牙复合树脂修复体直接覆盖牙尖的临床评价
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2006;18(5):256-65; discussion 266-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2006.00033.x.
7
One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth.两种不同类型复合树脂用于后牙的一年临床评估
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008 May 1;9(4):26-33.
8
Clinical evaluation of different posterior resin composite materials: a 7-year report.不同后牙树脂复合材料的临床评估:一份7年报告。
Quintessence Int. 2003 Jun;34(6):418-26.
9
A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.后牙复合树脂修复体的临床评估:17年随访结果
J Dent. 2006 Aug;34(7):427-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.006. Epub 2005 Nov 28.
10
Saucer-shaped cavity preparations for posterior approximal resin composite restorations: observations up to 10 years.
Quintessence Int. 1998 Jan;29(1):5-11.

引用本文的文献

1
Effectiveness of Hall Technique for Primary Carious Molars: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.霍尔技术治疗乳牙龋的有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2019 Sep-Oct;12(5):445-452. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1666.
2
Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.后牙复合树脂修复体的使用寿命:一项系统评价与荟萃分析。
J Dent Res. 2014 Oct;93(10):943-9. doi: 10.1177/0022034514544217. Epub 2014 Jul 21.
3
Mechanical performance of novel bioactive glass containing dental restorative composites.
含新型生物活性玻璃的牙科修复复合材料的机械性能
Dent Mater. 2013 Nov;29(11):1139-48. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2013.08.207. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
4
Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can't predict?树脂基复合材料性能:是否存在我们无法预测的情况?
Dent Mater. 2013 Jan;29(1):51-8. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.06.013. Epub 2012 Jul 17.
5
Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner.有或没有可流动复合衬层的可填充型后牙复合树脂的两年临床性能
Clin Oral Investig. 2003 Sep;7(3):129-34. doi: 10.1007/s00784-003-0220-9. Epub 2003 Jul 29.