Chana H S, Pearson G J, Ibbetson R J
Conservation Department, Eastman Dental Institute, London.
Br Dent J. 1997 Aug 23;183(4):130-4. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4809443.
To compare the effect of two construction techniques and two pattern materials on the fit of resin-bonded cast restorations.
In-vitro study carried out by one operator.
Postgraduate university hospital.
65 nickel-chrome castings were constructed using refractory die and lift-off techniques with wax and acrylic resin pattern material. They were cemented onto master silver dies, embedded in self-curing acrylic resin and sectioned along their long axes. Interfacial distance between the master silver die and casting was measured.
A significant different between the range of figures in each group (Mann-Whitney Test, P < 0.01) was found. Construction techniques can be ranked in order of fit of castings: 1. Refractory die, wax patterns: 42.6 microns (SD 12.03). 2. Refractory die, acrylic resin patterns: 53.7 microns (SD.16.06).3. Conventional technique, acrylic resin patterns: 85.5 microns (SD 31.62). 4. Lift-off technique, wax patterns: 139 microns (SD 53.15).5. Lift-off technique, acrylic patterns: 172.8 microns (SD 74.04).
Castings constructed using refractory die technique and subsequently cemented resulted in a more accurate and less variable fit than those produced with the lift-off technique. Wax patterns lead to more accurate castings than acrylic resin and locating indentations may interfere with the cementation of castings when lift-off techniques are used.
比较两种制作工艺和两种模型材料对树脂粘结铸造修复体贴合度的影响。
由一名操作人员进行的体外研究。
研究生大学医院。
使用耐火代型及脱模技术,分别采用蜡型和丙烯酸树脂模型材料制作65个镍铬铸件。将它们粘结到主银代型上,嵌入自凝丙烯酸树脂中,并沿其长轴进行切片。测量主银代型与铸件之间的界面距离。
发现每组数据范围之间存在显著差异(曼-惠特尼检验,P < 0.01)。铸造修复体的贴合度按制作工艺排序如下:1. 耐火代型、蜡型:42.6微米(标准差12.03)。2. 耐火代型、丙烯酸树脂型:53.7微米(标准差16.06)。3. 传统工艺、丙烯酸树脂型:85.5微米(标准差31.62)。4. 脱模技术、蜡型:139微米(标准差53.15)。5. 脱模技术、丙烯酸树脂型:172.8微米(标准差74.04)。
采用耐火代型技术制作并随后粘结的铸件,其贴合度比采用脱模技术制作的铸件更精确且变异性更小。蜡型铸造的修复体比丙烯酸树脂型更精确,并且在使用脱模技术时,定位凹槽可能会干扰铸件的粘结。