双固化树脂核冠与纤维桩核冠修复不同牙体剩余厚度磨牙残冠的临床对比研究

Clinical comparison of dual-cure composite resin and fiber post-retained crowns in restoration of different thickness residual molar crown

目的:比较双固化树脂核冠与纤维桩核冠两种方法修复不同牙体剩余厚度磨牙残冠的成功率,探讨不同残冠剩余牙体厚度对两种修复方法临床效果的影响。方法:收集96例经完善根管治疗的牙体缺损磨牙病例,按牙体预备后残留牙体厚度为1.0mm及2.0mm分为两组各48例,每组随机各选择24例分别采用双固化树脂制作树脂核后全冠修复及纤维桩全冠修复,修复后12个月比较两种修复方法对不同牙体厚度残冠的修复效果。结果:牙体剩余厚度为1.0mm时,双固化树脂核冠组的成功率为91.7%,纤维桩核冠组的成功率为95.8%,组间差异无显著性(P>0.05);牙体剩余厚度为2.0mm时,双固化树脂核冠组的成功率为100.0%,纤维桩核冠组的成功率为100.0%,组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:磨牙残冠剩余牙体厚度大于等于1mm时,双固化树脂核冠及纤维桩核冠修复效果相同,但双固化树脂核冠修复临床操作更为简便。

Objective To evaluate the effects of the amount of residual tooth on restoration to residual molar crown in dual-cure composite resin and fiber post-retained crowns.Compare the success rates between two methods in restoration of different thickness residual molar crown.Methods 96 endodontically treated molars were divided into two groups randomly,the group with the residual thickness was 1.0mm(n=48) and group with the residual thickness was 2.0mm(n=48).And each group was divided into two groups randomly,the group with dual-cure composite resin and group with fiber post,each subgroup has 24 molars.The comparison was done at 12 month post-treatment.Results The success rate of group with dual-cure composite resin(91.7%,100.0%) was resulted in non-significant difference compared to the group with fiber post(95.8%,100.0%) when the residual thickness was 1.0mm and 2.0mm(P>0.05).Conclusion The restorations with dual-cure composite resin and fiber post-retained crowns were both successful when the residual molar thickness was more than 1.0mm,but composite resin core was more convenient in clinic.