论文部分内容阅读
目的:对使用3M FiltekTMZ350和可乐丽菲露AP-XTM2种不同光固化复合树脂充填楔状缺损的疗效进行比较分析。方法:200颗患牙分为实验组和对照组,每组各100颗,分别将3M FiltekTMZ350树脂(配套使用3M AdperPrompt自蚀黏合剂)和可乐丽菲露AP-XTM树脂(配套使用可乐丽菲露SE Bond树脂黏合剂)按照各自产品说明书进行窝洞处理、黏结、充填、固化和磨光,经过1/2a、1a、2a观察后,采用USPH&Ryge评估标准评价2组疗效,采用SPSS13.0软件包对数据进行χ2检验。结果:2种树脂的继发龋、边缘密合性、边缘着色、表面粗糙度、色泽匹配、牙龈健康状况在1/2a和1a后的差异均无显著性。2a后,试验组和对照组相比,继发龋、磨耗、边缘密合度、边缘着色和色泽匹配性的差异均有显著性,实验组优于对照组,其他各项无显著差异。结论:比较用于充填Ⅳ类洞的2种树脂材料,3M FiltekTMZ350树脂具有更多的优越性,值得临床推广使用。
OBJECTIVE: To compare and analyze the curative effect of filling two kinds of light-cured composite resin with 3M Filtek TM Z350 and Coke Lifeline AP-XTM. Methods: 200 teeth were divided into experimental group and control group with 100 in each group. 3M FiltekTM Z350 resin (with 3M AdperPrompt self-etching adhesive) and Coke Lily AP-XTM resin (with Coke Lifeline SE Bond resin adhesive) according to their product specifications for cavity processing, bonding, filling, curing and polishing, after 1 / 2a, 1a, 2a after the observation, the USPH & Ryge evaluation criteria to evaluate the two groups of efficacy, using SPSS13.0 software The package performs χ2 test on the data. Results: There was no significant difference in secondary caries, marginal adhesion, edge coloring, surface roughness, color matching and gum health status after 1 / 2a and 1a. Compared with the control group, the differences of secondary caries, abrasion, marginal adhesion, edge coloration and color matching between the experimental group and the control group were significant. The experimental group was superior to the control group, and the other items had no significant difference. CONCLUSION: Compared with the two kinds of resin materials used for filling Class IV caves, 3M FiltekTM Z350 resin has more advantages and is worthy of clinical promotion.