不同材料对楔状缺损疗效影响的分析  

Research on efficacy of treatment for teeth wedge-shaped defects with different materials

作　　者：王华娟[1] 

机构地区：[1]安徽省阜阳市第六人民医院口腔科,236000

出　　处：《齐齐哈尔医学院学报》2014年第9期1333-1334,共2页Journal of Qiqihar Medical University

摘　　要：目的比较Dyract AP复合体和3M-VitremerTM光固化玻璃离子水门汀两种材料修复牙体楔状缺损的临床效果。方法便利取样法选取2009年7月至2011年6月接受楔状缺损修复治疗的89例患者的246颗楔状缺损患牙,随机法分为A、B两组。A组(121颗)采用Dyract AP复合体充填修复,B组(125颗)采用3M-VitremerTM光固化玻璃离子水门汀充填修复,随访期为2年,评定两种材料修复成功率。结果术后1年末,A组患牙修复成功率(91.0%)与B组(93.2%)比较,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.393,P>0.05);术后2年末,A组成功率(79.4%)显著低于B组(89.4%),两组差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.100,P<0.05)。结论 3M-VitremerTM光固化玻璃离子水门汀修复楔状缺损效果优于Dyract AP复合体。Objective To evaluate clinically the efficacy of two materials （ Dyract AP and 3M-Vitremer glass-ionomer cement） for restoration of dental wedge-shaped defects. Methods In the research, a total of 246 teeth with wedge-shaped defects were restored by Dyract AP and 3M-Vitremer glass-ionomer cement from July 2009 to June 2011 and the 89 out-patients were collected by convenience sampling method. The 246 teeth were randomly divided into two groups. The defects of group A were restored by Dyract AP complex and group B by 3M-Vitremer glass-ionomer cement. One-year and two year follow-up results were evaluated with modified USPHS evaluation criterion. Results There were no significant differences between the 1-year successful rate of group A （91.0%）and that of group B（93.2% ） （X^2 =0. 393, P 〉0. 05）. The 2-year successful rate of group A（79. 4% ）was lower than that of group B（ 89.4% ） , and the difference was statistically significant（ X^2 = 4. 100, P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusions The efficacy of 3 M-Vitremer glass-ionomer cement is superior to that of Dyract AP complex in treating teeth with wedge-shaped defects.

关 键 词：DYRACT AP复合体 3M-VitremerTM光固化玻璃离子水门汀 楔状缺损 

分 类 号：R783.3[医药卫生—口腔医学]