探讨两种CAD/CAM嵌体冠修复短冠第二磨牙的临床效果

Clinical evaluation of two CAD/CAM endocrown restorations of short coronal second molar

目的:评价两种CAD/CAM玻璃陶瓷制作的嵌体冠修复根管治疗后短冠磨牙的临床效果。方法:选择根管治疗后短冠第二磨牙140颗进行CAD/CAM嵌体冠修复。A组67颗,修复材料为二矽酸锂加强型玻璃陶瓷IPS e.max;B组73颗,修复材料为氧化锆加强型玻璃陶瓷Suprinity。所有患者修复后每6个月随访1次,进行改良美国公共卫生署(United States Public Health Service,USPHS)检查指标及分级标准评价,对两组修复体修复后12、24、36个月的A级率进行统计学分析。结果:140颗磨牙修复完成后随访3年,7例折裂(A组3例,B组4例),133例成功。两组修复后12、24、36个月的A级率均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:二矽酸锂和氧化锆加强型玻璃陶瓷制作的嵌体冠适合于根管治疗后大面积缺损短冠磨牙的修复,其修复效果无差异。

Objective:To evaluate the clinical effect of CAD/CAM endocrown restorations fabricated by two different reinforced ceramic materials on endodontically treated short coronal second molars.Methods:Totally 140 short coronal second molars were randomly divided into two groups,that 67 in group A were restored by Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic endocrowns and 73 in group B were restored by zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic endocrowns.All of them 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 using Chi-squared test.Results:Of the 140 restorations followed up to 3 years,7 failures occurred which were ceramic fracture,3 occurred in group A and 4 in group B.Chi-squared test comparing incidence rates between two groups after 12,24 and 36 months showed no significant difference(P>0.05).Conclusion:Endocrowns would appear to be a reliable approach to restore endodontically treated short coronal second molar.Lithium Disilicate glass-ceramic and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic were suitable for endocrown restorations of short coronal second molar.