大块充填复合树脂与传统复合树脂在后牙牙体缺损修复中的疗效对比

Clinical Effection of Bulk Fill and Nanofill Composite Restorations in Posterior Lesions

目的:比较大块充填复合树脂和传统复合树脂对后牙邻牙合面牙体缺损修复的临床效果。方法:选择60例患者,120颗患牙自身对照,将每位患者的两颗GV BlackⅡ类缺损患牙随机分为Ⅰ、Ⅱ两组。Ⅰ组:Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill充填树脂整层充填;Ⅱ组:FiltekTM Z350传统复合树脂分层充填,临床随访观察2年,依据改良的美国公共卫生署的直接临床评价系统(USPHS),分别在修复体边缘着色、边缘密闭性、继发龋、表面形态、填充术后敏感及充填体脱落6个方面评价两种充填技术的临床效果。结果:随访2年内,两种树脂粘接修复后的临床效果接近,两组比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:大块充填复合树脂与传统复合树脂修复后牙GV BlackⅡ类洞缺损均显示出了很好的临床效果,2年的随访中,疗效相当。

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of bulk fill and nanofill composite restorations in posterior lesions.Methods Sixty patients with 120 premolars or molars with equivalent posterior lesions.Two posterior lesions teeth of each patient were randomly divided into two groups:GroupⅠwas treated with Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill,GroupⅡwas treated universal nano‑hybrid resin composite FiltekTM Z350.The patients were followed up 2 years.The results were evaluated by modified USPHS criteria and statistically analyzed using the Fisher’s exact test.Results Follow up for 2 years showed that there were no significant differences in sensitivity evaluation,material loss,marginal discolor,marginal adaptation,secondary caries and surface texture between the three groups(P>0.05).Conclusion The bulk-fill composite resin and nanofill composite showed similar clinical performances in the restoration of posterior lesions.