论文部分内容阅读
目的 探讨修复楔形缺损较好的材料（ 方法） 。方法 在同一个体上， 选择条件基本相同的楔形缺损患牙， 分别应用 Ｄｙｒａｃｔ 复合材料、夹层技术及光固化复合树脂充填修复， 共１２０ 例３６０ 颗患牙， 随访观察１２ ～１８月。结果 Ｄｙｒａｃｔ 组、夹层技术组修复物脱落率分别为１ ．６７ ％ 、２ ．５０ ％ ， 两组之间无显著性差异（ Ｐ＞ ０ ．０５） ， 与复合树脂组比较有显著性差异（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５） ； Ｄｙｒａｃｔ 组、夹层技术组密合度失败率及牙髓病变发生率均为０ ， 两组之间无差异， 与复合树脂组比较有显著性差异（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５） ； Ｄｙｒａｃｔ 组、夹层技术组总失败率分别为１ ．６７ ％ 、２ ．５０ ％ ， 两组之间无显著性差异（ Ｐ＞ ０ ．０５） ， 与复合树脂组比较有非常显著性差异（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０１） 。结论 Ｄｙｒａｃｔ 复合材料与复合树脂玻璃离子夹层技术均是修复楔形缺损较好的材料（ 方法
Objective To investigate the material (method) for repairing wedge-shaped defect. Methods In the same individual, teeth of wedge-shaped defect with the same basic conditions were selected and repaired with Dyract composite, sandwich technology and light-cured composite resin respectively. A total of 120 cases with 360 teeth were observed and followed up for 12-18 months. Results The Dyract group and the sandwich group had a rate of 1 for the restoration of the prosthesis. 67%, 2. 50%, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05), which was significantly different from the composite resin group (P <0.05) (P <0.05). The total failure rates of Dyract group and sandwich group were 1, respectively. There was no difference between the two groups. 67%, 2. 50%, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05), compared with the composite resin group has a very significant difference (P <0.01). Conclusion Both Dyract composite and composite resin glass ionomer are good materials for repairing wedge-shaped defects