Scheibenbogen A, Manhart J, Kunzelmann K H, Hickel R
Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
J Prosthet Dent. 1998 Oct;80(4):410-6. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70004-6.
There are only a few studies available that deal with the clinical behavior of composite and ceramic inlay systems as potential substitutes for amalgam restorations.
This prospective clinical trial evaluated composite and ceramic inlay systems for clinical acceptability as restorative materials in single or multisurface cavities of posterior teeth and provided 1-year results.
Forty-seven composite inlays (Tetric, Blend-a-lux, Pertac) and 24 heat-pressed ceramic inlays (IPS Empress) were placed in 45 patients by 7 student operators under the supervision of an experienced dentist. The first clinical evaluation was performed 11 to 13 months after placement of the restorations and used modified United States Public Health Services criteria.
Satisfactory results over this period were found, as 100% of ceramic inlays and 94% of composite inlays were assessed to be clinically excellent and acceptable. Only 3 composite inlay restorations were scored delta (unacceptable). Two inlays exhibited secondary caries and 1 demonstrated loss of pulp vitality. For the criteria "anatomic form of the surface" and "marginal integrity," ceramic inlays were significantly better than composite inlays.
Posterior tooth-colored inlays provided acceptable and excellent clinical service, even if they are placed by relatively inexperienced student operators.
仅有少数研究涉及复合树脂和陶瓷嵌体系统作为银汞合金修复体潜在替代品的临床性能。
这项前瞻性临床试验评估了复合树脂和陶瓷嵌体系统在后牙单表面或多表面窝洞作为修复材料的临床可接受性，并给出了1年的结果。
在一名经验丰富的牙医监督下，7名学生操作者为45名患者放置了47个复合树脂嵌体（Tetric、Blend-a-lux、Pertac）和24个热压陶瓷嵌体（IPS Empress）。修复体放置11至13个月后进行首次临床评估，采用修改后的美国公共卫生服务标准。
在此期间发现了令人满意的结果，100%的陶瓷嵌体和94%的复合树脂嵌体在临床评估中被评为优秀和可接受。只有3个复合树脂嵌体修复体被评为较差（不可接受）。2个嵌体出现继发龋，1个牙髓活力丧失。对于“表面解剖形态”和“边缘完整性”标准，陶瓷嵌体明显优于复合树脂嵌体。
后牙树脂嵌体即使由经验相对不足的学生操作者放置，也能提供可接受且良好的临床效果。
