检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]大庆油田总医院四厂医院口腔科,黑龙江大庆163511 [2]哈尔滨医科大学口腔医学院修复科,哈尔滨150001
出 处:《中国实用口腔科杂志》2009年第4期215-216,共2页Chinese Journal of Practical Stomatology
摘 要:目的比较前磨牙残根桩核单冠修复与残根桩核联冠修复的临床效果。方法对2000年1月至2004年1月在哈尔滨医科大学口腔医学院修复科就诊的患者203例共238颗患牙(上前磨牙残根126颗,下前磨牙残根112颗),根据患牙残根邻牙的牙体情况分别采用烤瓷单冠修复(A组,116颗残根)、与邻牙联合烤瓷冠修复(B组,122颗残根)。结果经过3、5年的随访观察,3年时单冠修复成功率为89.38%,联合烤瓷冠修复成功率为91.45%,两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);5年时,单冠修复成功率为71.43%,联合烤瓷冠成修复成功率为88.60%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论前磨牙残根桩核联冠修复具有更好的临床效果。Objective To compare the clinical effect between single post-core-crown and combined crown applied tot he restoration for residual roots of premolar.Methods A total of 203 cases were randomly divided into two groups according to two different treatments.Among 238 teeth with residual roots of premolar,116 teeth were restored with singlep orcelain fused to metal crown and 122 teeth were restored with combined porcelain fused to metal crown.ResultsW ith 3 to 5 years of follow-up study,single crown applied to the restoration for residual roots of premolar group had8 9.38%to 71.43%success rate,combined crown 91.45%to 88.60%.The success rate had no difference in 3 years of follow-up study and no significant difference in 5 years of follow-up study withχ 2 test.Conclusion Combined crown hasb etter clinical effect than single crown used to restore residual roots of premolar.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15