论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨年轻恒磨牙牙体深缺损不同修复方式的临床效果差异。方法:选择患者357例,共480颗牙,随机分成嵌体修复,夹层充填,树脂充填,银汞充填4组,追踪观察1～2年临床疗效。结果:1年后复诊四种修复方式在牙体完整性、磨耗情况、邻接关系无显著性差异;龈缘密合度、继发龋存在组间显著性差异。2年后复诊四种修复方式牙体完整性、磨耗情况无显著性差异,在龈缘密合度,继发龋,邻接关系上存在组间显著性差异。充填1年内出现应激性疼痛,存在组间显著性差异。结论:夹层充填在预防应激性疼痛、保存健康牙髓优于其他三组,适应于年轻恒磨牙深缺损的治疗。
Objective: To investigate the clinical effects of different repair methods on deep permanent molar tooth defects. Methods: A total of 357 patients with 480 teeth were randomly divided into 4 groups: inlay repair, mezzanine filling, resin filling and amalgam filling, followed up for 1 to 2 years. Results: There was no significant difference in the integrity, wear status and adjacency between the four repair methods after one year follow-up. There was significant difference between gingival adhesion and secondary caries. There was no significant difference in dental integrity and wear between the two repair methods after 2 years. There were significant differences between the two groups in gingival adhesion, secondary caries and adjacent relationship. Stress-induced pain occurred within 1 year of filling, with significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Mezzanine filling is better than the other three groups in preventing stress pain and preserving healthy pulp, which is suitable for the treatment of deep deciduous molar defects.