两种椅旁全瓷材料用于后牙嵌体冠修复的临床效果评价

Clinical evaluation of two different chair-side ceramic materials for endocrown restorations of endodontically treated posterior teeth

目的:评价两种椅旁全瓷材料制作的嵌体冠修复根管治疗后牙的临床效果。方法:选择剩余牙体组织大于3个壁,轴壁厚度大于2 mm的根管治疗后的第一磨牙216颗,修复方式均为嵌体冠,所有病例随机分为A、B两组,A组修复材料为Mark II,B组为Suprinity,每6个月复诊1次,进行改良美国公共卫生署(Untied States Public Health Service,USPHS)检查指标、分级标准评价,比较两组修复后12、24、36个月的A级率。结果:216颗患牙修复完成后36个月随访期间,7例折裂(A组4例,B组3例),209例成功;两组修复后12、24、36个月的临床效果A级率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:CAD/CAM嵌体冠适合用于修复大面积缺损的根管治疗牙,长石质玻璃陶瓷及加强型玻璃陶瓷材料均可用于嵌体冠修复,其修复效果无差异。

Objective:To evaluate the clinical effect of endocrown restorations fabricated by two different chair-side ceramic materials on endodontically treated posterior teeth.Methods:Totally 216 endodontically treated posterior teeth were divided into group A and B randomly,all of them were restored by endocrowns.The restoration material of group A was Mark II and group B was Suprinity,and all of the patients were followed up every 6 months.The modified United States Public Health Service criteria(USPHS)were used to assess the clinical behavior of the restorations.Data were descriptively analyzed and the class A rates were calculated of two groups.Results:Of the 216 restorations,only 7 failures occurred that were the result of fracture.Of the 7 ceramic fractures,4 occurred in group A and 3 in group B.Chi-square test comparing incidence rates between group A and group B showed no significant difference(P>0.05).Conclusion:Endocrowns would appear to be a reliable approach to restore severely damaged endodontically treated posterior teeth.All the feldspathic porcelain and reinforced glass-ceramic materials were suitable for endocrown restorations.