论文部分内容阅读
传统的金瓷固定桥具有热传导性高、热膨胀系数高、阻射X线等缺点,而瓷却具有热传导性低、热膨胀系数低及透射X线等优点,故目前对于全瓷修复的研究日趋深入而广泛。然而迄今未能有一种代用品具有金属支架的强度和适合性。本实验目的在于比较金瓷和全瓷固定桥的强度和适合性。材料和方法四个不锈钢主模均仿造下颌第二前磨牙及第二磨牙,用以制作修复第一磨牙的固定桥,边缘为台肩形预备。对其中之一复制20个环氧树脂主模,再用一不锈钢主模分别复制20个人造石工作模、20个环氧树脂工作模。不锈钢主模用于评价强度,环氧树脂主模用于评价适合性。两个系统的底层结构设计相同,蜡型制作相同,然后分别按传统的金瓷修复和Cerestore全瓷修复的操作常规完成修复体,将用以评价适合性的
The traditional porcelain fixed bridge with high thermal conductivity, high thermal expansion coefficient, X-ray radiation and other shortcomings, but with low thermal conductivity, low coefficient of thermal expansion and X-ray transmission and so on, so the current research on all-ceramic repair more and more in-depth And extensive. However, so far there is no alternative that has the strength and suitability of a metal stent. The purpose of this experiment is to compare the strength and suitability of gold porcelain and all-ceramic fixed bridges. MATERIALS AND METHODS Four stainless steel master molds were used to simulate the mandibular second premolar and the second molar to make a fixed bridge for the restoration of the first molar. Duplicate one of the 20 main epoxy molds, and then use a stainless steel master replicate 20 artificial stone work mode, 20 epoxy work mode. The stainless steel master mold is used to evaluate the strength and the epoxy master mold is used to evaluate suitability. Both systems have the same underlying design and the same wax pattern and are then routinely completed with prosthetics as per the conventional gold-ceramic restoration and Cerestore all-ceramic restoration procedures to evaluate suitability