3种桩核冠修复牙体缺损的临床研究  

Teeth Restored by Crown and Three Different Core and Post Materials

作　　者：王庆[1] 顾章愉[1] 余优成[1] 阮宏[1] 丁小军[1] 毕玮[1] 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学附属中山医院口腔科,上海200032

出　　处：《中国临床医学》2004年第5期856-858,共3页Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine

摘　　要：目的 :采用铸造桩核冠、螺纹桩 -光固化树脂核冠和螺纹桩 -银粉玻璃离子核冠修复大面积牙体缺损的恒牙 ,观察并比较 3种桩核临床修复效果。方法 :对 1998年 1月～ 2 0 0 0年 10月期间共 2 0 3颗经完善根管治疗的大面积缺损的恒牙 ,80颗用铸造桩核冠 ,6 6颗用螺纹桩 -光固化树脂核冠 ,5 7颗用螺纹桩 -银粉玻璃离子核冠修复 ,随访 2～ 4年。结果 :3种修复方法的成功率依次为 91.3%、90 .9%和 91.2 %。 3组之间互相比较无显著差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论 :对牙体缺损修复 3种桩核冠法均有较好的效果 ,并且各有优缺点 ,临床医师应根据实际情况加以选择。Objective: To analysis the effect and characters of three different core and post materials. Methods: 203 permanent teeth with roots canal treatment were restored by crown and three different core and post materials from Jan 1998 to Oct 2000. 80 cases by cast core and post, 66 cases by prefabricated screw post and resin core and 57 cases by prefabricated screw post and alloy-reinforced glass ionomer core. Following up periods was from 1 to 4 years. Results: The success rate was 91.3%, 90.9% and 91.2% respectively. There was no significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion:Three different materials are all good in teeth restoration, and each group has its own advantages. It is important to select indications correctly.

关 键 词：铸造桩核冠 牙体缺损 桩核冠修复 银粉玻璃离子 恒牙 光固化树脂 螺纹桩 完善 目的 优缺点 

分 类 号：R783[医药卫生—口腔医学] R781.05[医药卫生—临床医学]