流体树脂和玻璃离子充填乳磨牙邻面早期龋的疗效分析  

Efficacy analysis of flowable composite resin and glass ionomer in filling interproximal early caries of primary molars

作　　者：吕雪芹[1] 许建辉[1] LYU Xueqin;XU Jianhui(Department of Stomatology,Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University,Zhenjiang 212000,China)

机构地区：[1]江苏大学附属医院口腔科,江苏镇江212000

出　　处：《口腔医学》2018年第8期717-719,共3页Stomatology

摘　　要：目的比较流体树脂和玻璃离子充填乳磨牙邻面早期龋的临床效果。方法采用自身对照法,每组各纳入45颗牙齿,分别观察在修复后3、6、12个月的保存情况。结果玻璃离子修复乳磨牙邻面早期龋总失败率高于流体树脂(P<0.05),失败率随时间延长而增大,在修复1年后差别出现显著性(P<0.05)。在各种失败原因分析中,玻璃离子在耐磨性、抗折裂方面明显差于流体树脂(P<0.05)。结论玻璃离子充填乳磨牙邻面早期龋的失败率高于流体树脂,但2种材料各有优缺点,临床应用时要根据不同病例选择合适的材料。Objective To compare the clinical effects between flowable composite resin and glass ionomer in filling interproximal early caries of primary molars. Methods Self control method was used. 45 teeth were included in each group. The conservation condition of each group in 3 months,6 months,12 months was observed. Results The general failure rate of glass ionomer was significantly higher than flowable composite resin in the restoration of interproximal early caries of primary molar（ P〈0.05）. The failure rate gradually became higher and higher over time. There was not a significantly difference until 1 year later after the restoration（ P〈0.05）. As for the characteristics of anti-fracture and abrasive resistance,flowable resin was better than glass ionomer among various failed reasons analysis（ P0. 05）. Conclusion Suitable material should be selected according to different cases because every material has its two sides,although the general failure rate of ionomer is higher than the flowable resin in filling interproximal caries of primary molars.

关 键 词：流体树脂 玻璃离子 乳磨牙 邻面早期龋 

分 类 号：R788.1[医药卫生—口腔医学]