塑料、烤瓷、类瓷、铸瓷修复体的临床比较研究

ACLINICALLYCOMPARATIVESTUDYONRESIN,PORCELAIN,MIMIC CERAMICSANDCASTCERAMICSPROTHESESSUNFeng,WEIKeli,QIANDuanshen,ZHANGGuirong,GUOXiaojun,YUHong(ClinicofStomatology,BeijingMedicalUniversity,Beijing100034)MeSHPlasticsDentalprosthesisDentalporcelainMetalcera

目的：探讨目前常用的美学修复材料各自的特点和适应证。方法：对１３９例患者分别进行的塑料、烤瓷、类瓷和铸瓷的修复各６５件，共２６０件，进行了１年的临床观察和问卷式调查，用卡方数据进行比较处理。结果：塑料修复体在颜色、边缘密合度和基牙牙龈状态方面均逊色于烤瓷、类瓷和铸瓷修复体，差异有极显著性，而烤瓷和类瓷与铸瓷修复体在形态、边缘密合度和基牙牙龈状态方面效果相似，差异均无显著性，但铸瓷修复体的折断率明显高于烤瓷和类瓷者，烤瓷与铸瓷在颜色方面有显著性差异。结论：塑料只能作为暂时固定修复材料，烤瓷、类瓷与铸瓷各有其相应的临床适应证。

Objective: To study the characteristics and indication of resin, porcelain,mimic ceramics and cast ceramic prostheses. Methods: 260 prostheses were prepared with above materials for 139 patients. One year later, a follow up examination was carried out, and the subjective feelings were investigated by question and answer papers. Results: Resin protheses were worse than others in colour, margin sealing, gingival status of abutments. The porcelin, mimic ceramics and cast ceramics protheses were similar in shape, margin sealing and gingival status of abutments ( P >0.05). The cast ceramics prostheses were easily fractured. Conclusion: The resin protheses should only be used for temporary fixed protheses. Porcelain, mimic ceramics and cast ceramics protheses have their indications, and they are worthy to be used in clinic.