穆海丽;田福聪;王晓燕;高学军;

• 1:北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院牙体牙髓科国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室口腔数字医学北京市重点实验室
• 2:北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院第一门诊部综合科
• 3:Department of Endodontics
• 4:Dental College of Georgia Augusta University

摘要(Abstract)：

目的:采用激光三维扫描技术评估玻璃体和通用型复合树脂用于后牙充填的耐磨性。方法:根据纳入标准选取48名患者共108颗患牙(每组各54颗),随机分配用玻璃体(BeautifilⅡ,简称BF)或通用型复合树脂(Filtek Z350,简称Z350)进行充填。分别于术后1周、6个月、18个月和4年,采用改良美国公共卫生署(United States Public Health Service,USPHS)标准对充填体进行临床评价并拍照和制取模型。使用激光三维扫描仪扫描模型后,对图像进行配准和计算磨耗深度,使用SPSS 20.0进行统计分析。结果:术后4年回访43名患者,回访率为89.6%。BF组和Z350组各有4例和3例出现脱落、继发龋、充填体折断和牙髓坏死。两组充填体的4年存留率均为95.8%,符合美国牙医协会(American Dental Association,ADA)标准(3年存留率> 90%)。0～6个月两组充填体的磨耗速率最快,随后磨耗速率的下降趋于平缓,BF组4年总磨耗深度为(58±22)μm,Z350组为(54±16)μm(P> 0.05),耐磨性均符合ADA标准(3年磨耗深度<100μm)。两组充填体均表现为围绕咬合接触区形成凹坑状磨耗(Ⅰ型)和充填体发生均匀磨耗(Ⅱ型)。术后4年,Ⅰ型磨耗充填体中,BF组的磨耗深度大于Z350组(P <0.05),Ⅱ型磨耗充填体中,两组间差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。结论:玻璃体的4年存留率和耐磨性均符合ADA标准,用于后牙牙合面重咬合接触区时,玻璃体的耐磨性略逊于复合树脂,用于非重咬合接触区时,二者间无明显差异。

关键词(KeyWords)： 复合树脂类;牙修复磨损;成像,三维

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation):

作者(Author): 穆海丽;田福聪;王晓燕;高学军;

Email:

DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.01.018

参考文献(References)：

• [1]Gordan VV,Blaser PK,Watson RE,et al.A clinical evaluation of a giomer restorative system containing surface prereacted glass ionomer filler:results from a 13-year recall examination[J].JAm Dent Assoc,2014,145(10):1036-1043．
• [2]Manhart J,Chen HY,Hickel R.Clinical evaluation of the posterior composite Quixfil in classⅠandⅡcavities:4-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial[J].J Adhes Dent,2010,12(3):237-243．
• [3]Oz FD,Ergin E,Canatan S.Twenty-four-month clinical performance of different universal adhesives in etch-and-rinse,selective etching and self-etch application modes in NCCL:a randomized controlled clinical trial[J].J Appl Oral Sci,2019,27:e20180358．
• [4]Koc Vural U,Meral E,Ergin E,et al.Twenty-four-month clinical performance of a glass hybrid restorative in non-carious cervical lesions of patients with bruxism:a split-mouth,randomized clinical trial[J].Clin Oral Investig,2020,24(3):1229-1238．
• [5]Hayashi M,Wilson NH.Failure risk of posterior composites with post-operative sensitivity[J].Oper Dent,2003,28 (6):681-688．
• [6]Heintze SD.Clinical relevance of tests on bond strength,microleakage and marginal adaptation[J].Dent Mater,2013,29(1):59-84．
• [7]Naoum S,Ellakwa A,Martin F,et al.Fluoride release,recharge and mechanical property stability of various fluoride-containing resin composites[J].Oper Dent,2011,36(4):422-432．
• [8]Ikemura K,Tay FR,Endo T,et al.A review of chemicalapproach and ultramorphological studies on the development of fluoride-releasing dental adhesives comprising new pre-reacted glass ionomer (PRG) fillers[J].Dent Mater J,2008,27 (3):315-339．
• [9]Saku S,Kotake H,Scougall-Vilchis RJ,et al.Antibacterial activity of composite resin with glass-ionomer filler particles[J].Dent Mater J,2010,29(2):193-198．
• [10]Kitagawa H,Miki-Oka S,Mayanagi G,et al.Inhibitory effect of resin composite containing S-PRG filler on Streptococcus mutans glucose metabolism[J].J Dent,2018,70:92-96．
• [11]Kakuta K,Wonglamsam A,Goto S,et al.Surface textures of composite resins after combined wear test simulating both occlusal wear and brushing wear[J].Dent Mater J,2012,31(1):61-67．
• [12]Ruivo MA,Pacheco RR,Sebold M,et al.Surface roughness and filler particles characterization of resin-based composites[J].Microsc Res Tech,2019,82(10):1756-1767．
• [13]Condo R,Cerroni L,Pasquantonio G,et al.A deep morphological characterization and comparison of different dental restorative materials[J].Biomed Res Int,2017,2017:7346317．
• [14]Heintze SD,Faouzi M,Rousson V,et al.Correlation of wear in vivo and six laboratory wear methods[J].Dent Mater,2012,28(9):961-973．
• [15]Heintze SD,Ilie N,Hickel R,et al.Laboratory mechanical parameters of composite resins and their relation to fractures and wear in clinical trials:A systematic review[J].Dent Mater,2017,33(3):e101-e114．
• [16]Hickel R,Roulet JF,Bayne S,et al.Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials[J].Clin Oral Investig,2007,11(1):5-33．
• [17]Leinfelder KF,Taylor DF,Barkmeier WW,et al.Quantitative wear measurement of posterior composite resins[J].Dent Mater,1986,2(5):198-201．
• [18]Mehl A,Gloger W,Kunzelmann KH,et al.A new optical 3-Ddevice for the detection of wear[J].J Dent Res,1997,76(11):1799-1807．
• [19]Palotie U,Eronen AK,Vehkalahti K,et al.Longevity of 2-and3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25-to 30-year-old attending Public Dental Service:A 13-year observation[J].J Dent,2017,62:13-17．
• [20]The American Dental Association.ADA acceptance program guidelines:resin based composites for posterior restorations[R].Chicago:ADA Council on Scientific Affairs,2001．
• [21]Lempel E,Toth A,Fabian T,et al.Retrospective evaluation of posterior direct composite restorations:10-year findings[J].Dent Mater,2015,31(2):115-122．
• [22]Demarco FF,Correa MB,Cenci MS,et al.Longevity of posterior composite restorations:not only a matter of materials[J].Dent Mater,2012,28(1):87-101．
• [23]Hewlett ER,Orro ME,Clark GT.Accuracy testing of three-dimensional digitizing systems[J].Dent Mater,1992,8(1):49-53．
• [24]Thongthammachat S,Moore BK,Barco MT 2nd,et al.Dimensional accuracy of dental casts:influence of tray material,impression material,and time[J].J Prosthodont,2002,11(2):98-108．
• [25]Palaniappan S,Bharadwaj D,Mattar DL,et al.Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite[J].Dent Mater,2009,25(11):1302-1314．
• [26]Palaniappan S,Elsen L,Lijnen I,et al.Nanohybrid and microfilled hybrid versus conventional hybrid composite restorations:5-year clinical wear performance[J].Clin Oral Investig,2012,16(1):181-190．
• [27]Goldberg AJ,Rydinge E,Santucci EA,et al.Clinical evaluation methods for posterior composite restorations[J].J Dent Res,1984,63(12):1387-1391．
• [28]da Rosa Rodolpho PA,Cenci MS,Donassollo TA,et al.A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations:17-year findings[J].J Dent,2006,34(7):427-435．
• [29]Wilson NHF,Norman RD.Five-year findings of a multiclinical trial for posterior composite[J].J Dent,1991,19 (3):153-159．
• [30]Satou N,Khan AM,Satou K,et al.In-vitro and in-vivo wear profile of composite resins[J].J Oral Rehabil,1992,19(1):31-37．
• [31]Salgado VE,Cavalcante LM,Silikas N,et al.The influence of nanoscale inorganic content over optical and surface properties of model composites[J].J Dent,2013,41(Suppl 5):e45-53．
• [32]Lim BS,Ferracane JL,Condon JR,et al.Effect of filler fraction and filler surface treatment on wear of microfilled composites[J].Dent Mater,2002,18(1):1-11．
• [33]Garoushi S,Vallittu PK,Lassila L.Characterization of fluoride releasing restorative dental materials[J].Dent Mater J,2018,37(2):293-300．
• [34]Gonulol N,Ozer S,Sen Tunc E.Water sorption,solubility,and color stability of giomer restoratives[J].J Esthet Restor Dent,2015,27(5):300-306．
• [35]Park CA,Hyun SH,Lee JH,et al.Evaluation of polymerization in fluoride-containing composite resins[J].J Mater Sci Mater Med,2007,18(8):1549-1556.