摘要
目的探讨2种印模方式制作Cerec全瓷嵌体修复牙体缺损的临床效果。方法将26例患者按随机数字表法分为直接法组和间接法组,每组13例。直接法组采用口内直接摄取光学取模;间接法组先在硅橡胶印模材料取模,翻制石膏模型,再从石膏模型上制取光学印模。均使用Cerec AC系统制作全瓷嵌体,修复完成6个月后对2组患者临床效果进行比较。结果 2组患者修复完成6个月后,在修复体外形上均达到了A类标准。在边缘适合性方面,直接法组制取光学印模略优于间接法组。间接法组1例修复体折裂,1例修复体脱落,经重新制作修复体后,效果满意。结论采用2种光学印模制取方法,制作Cerec AC系统全瓷嵌体修复牙体缺损,短期临床效果满意。
Objective To compare the clinic effects of two impression techniques on Cerec all- ceramic inlay restorations for dental defects. Methods Twenty-six patients with dental defects were randomly divided into two groups, with 13 patients in each group. Intraoral optical impression was taken in the direct method group. Silicone impression was made to prepare a plaster model and optical impression was taken in the indirect method group. All-ceramic inlays were manufactured using Cerec all-ceramic system. The clinical effects were compared between the two groups 6 months after restoration. Results The shape of prosthesis reached class A in all patients 6 months after restoratiop. The marginal fit in direct method group was slightly better than that in indirect method group. One patient in indirect method group had prosthetic fracture and 1 patient had prosthetic detachment. However, the results were satisfactory after remaking the restoration. Conclusion The short-term clinical efficacy of Cerec all-ceramic inlay restorations with the two optical impression techniques is satisfactory for dental defects.
出处
《实用临床医学（江西）》
CAS
2013年第2期85-86,99,共3页
Practical Clinical Medicine
