Abdalla A I, Alhadainy H A, García-Godoy F
College of Dentistry, University of Tanta, Egypt.
Am J Dent. 1997 Feb;10(1):18-20.
To evaluate the 2-year clinical performance of two polyacid-modified resin composites and two resin-modified glass ionomers in Class V carious cavities.
A total of 120 Class V cavities were selected and 30 cavities were restored with one of two resin-modified glass ionomer materials (Fuji II LC Improved and Vitremer) and two polyacid-modified resin composites (Dyract and Compoglass) in Class V carious cavities after 2 years. The restorations were clinically evaluated after 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria.
One-year findings revealed a significant difference in color match between Vitremer and other materials (P < 0.05) and no significant difference was found for the other criteria. Two-year results indicated a significant difference between resin-modified glass ionomers and polyacid-modified resin composite materials. The difference between Compoglass and Dyract was not statistically significant whereas the difference between Vitremer and Fuji II LC was statistically significant. Caries was not recorded at any evaluation period.
评估两种聚酸改性树脂复合材料和两种树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀在Ⅴ类龋洞中的2年临床性能。
共选择120个Ⅴ类洞，在Ⅴ类龋洞修复后2年，用两种树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀材料（改良富士Ⅱ LC和Vitremer）和两种聚酸改性树脂复合材料（Dyract和Compoglass）中的一种修复30个洞。修复体在1年和2年后使用美国公共卫生署（USPHS）标准进行临床评估。
1年的研究结果显示，Vitremer与其他材料之间在颜色匹配方面存在显著差异（P < 0.05），而在其他标准方面未发现显著差异。2年的结果表明，树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀与聚酸改性树脂复合材料之间存在显著差异。Compoglass和Dyract之间的差异无统计学意义，而Vitremer和富士Ⅱ LC之间的差异有统计学意义。在任何评估期均未记录到龋齿。
