论文部分内容阅读
目的比较不同充填材料应用于牙齿楔状缺损的临床疗效。方法将206颗楔状缺损患牙随机分为三组,分别用玻璃离子、流动复合树脂和复合体充填修复,观察12~14个月后的疗效。结果玻璃离子组的成功率为80.30%,流动复合树脂组的成功率为91.04%,复合体组的成功率为91.38%。复合体组与流动复合树脂组比较差异无统计学意义,而复合体组、流动复合树脂组与玻璃离子组比较差异有统计学意义。结论复合体和流动复合树脂远期疗效类似,均优于玻璃离子,是较为理想的牙齿楔状缺损充填材料。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of different filling materials on dental wedge-shaped defects. Methods Twenty-six wedge-shaped defects were randomly divided into three groups, respectively, with glass ions, mobile composite resin and composite filling repair, observation of 12 to 14 months after the curative effect. Results The success rate of glass ionomer group was 80.30%, that of flowable composite resin group was 91.04%, and that of composite group was 91.38%. There was no significant difference between the composite group and the flowable composite resin group, while the difference between the composite group, the flowable composite resin group and the glass ion group was statistically significant. Conclusion The long-term curative effect of composite and flowable composite resin are better than that of glass ion, which is an ideal filling material for dental wedge-shaped defect.