浅谈嵌体和高嵌体修复的临床应用

全冠修复是后牙牙体缺损最常见的修复方式之一,然而全冠修复由于备牙量大,对患牙抗折性存在潜在影响.随着粘接技术和微创修复的发展,嵌体和高嵌体可以大大减少牙体预备量,有效保存残留牙体组织,已逐渐成为后牙牙体缺损修复的主流形式,得到越来越广泛的应用.本文就嵌体和高嵌体修复的材料、适应证、修复效果、预备要点及粘接等各方面作一讨...     

铸瓷高嵌体修复后牙缺损的临床观察

目的：探讨全瓷高嵌体修复后牙缺损的应用及其保护作用。方法：选择牙体缺损较大，和／或已经过完善牙髓治疗的后牙48颗，制作全瓷高嵌体，追踪观察1-2年，用改良USPHS标准进行临床评价。结果：牙体、修复体完整性100％，边缘密合性83．3％，牙体外形、色泽及邻面接触关系恢复良好，仅1例有继发龋。结论：全瓷高嵌体是治疗后的牙体修复和保护牙体的的较理想的可靠修复方法。     

CAD/CAM全瓷高嵌体修复根管治疗后牙体缺损的临床评价

目的:采用瓷睿刻计算机辅助设计与制作(CAD/CAM)系统制作全瓷高嵌体修复根管治疗后的后牙牙体缺损,观察其1年期床疗效。方法::选取46例根管治疗后的后牙,使用瓷睿刻(CEREC)系统,IPS e.max CAD材料,制作全瓷高嵌体,双固化树脂水门汀粘结。修复后1年,采用改良USPHS标准对修复体、牙体、牙周等各方面指标进行评价,同时评价患者满意度。结果:87 ％的修复体各项检查标准都达到了USPHS 标准A类,患者满意率92％。CEREC 全瓷高嵌体1年期疗效确切。结论:使用瓷睿刻(CEREC)系统制作的 IPS e.max CAD全瓷高嵌体可作为根管治疗后后牙牙体缺损的有效修复方案。     

全瓷高嵌体修复根管治疗后牙体缺损的临床效果评价

目的采用E-Max全瓷高嵌体修复根管治疗后的牙体缺损,观察并评价其临床疗效。方法选取64例共72颗根管治疗后的牙齿,E-Max全瓷高嵌体修复,双固化树脂水门汀粘固。术后6、12、18个月复查。采用改良USPHS制定的全瓷修复临床评定标准对修复体各方面指标进行评价。结果 97.2%的修复体保持完整,未出现破裂、崩瓷、脱落,95.8%的修复体无牙龈炎症,食物嵌塞等并发症。结论全瓷高嵌体作为根管治疗后牙体缺损的修复,近期临床效果良好。     

CAD/CAM全瓷高嵌体修复磨牙大面积牙体缺损的临床疗效评价

目的探讨CEREC 3D椅旁计算机辅助设计和制作(computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture,CAD/CAM)系统制作全瓷高嵌体修复后牙牙体缺损的临床效果。方法对50例后牙牙体缺损患者,使用CEREC 3D椅旁CAD/CAM系统制作全瓷高嵌体,术后即刻和修复后6个月采用改良美国牙科协会评价标准对修复体进行评价,对患者进行满意度调查。结果修复后即刻检查边缘密合度、解剖外形、表面光滑度、色彩匹配度、牙龈健康和固位等6个方面达到满意比率分别为96%、98%、98%、94%、94%和100%,6个月后满意比率分别达到96%、98%、98%、94%、98%和100%。修复后6个月患者对全瓷高嵌体修复在形态、色彩和舒适性方面的满意度分别为88%、90%和92%。结论CEREC 3D椅旁CAD/CAM系统制作全瓷高嵌体修复后牙牙体缺损取得了较满意的初期临床效果,但是长期临床应用尚需进一步研究。     

CAD/CAM全瓷髓高嵌体在牙体缺损中的临床应用研究

目的　观察CAD/CAM全瓷髓高嵌体在牙体缺损中的临床效果。方法　选择71例病例(患牙82颗),其中男33例,女38例,年龄20~50岁,均采用IPS e.max CAD全瓷髓高嵌体进行后牙修复。随访24个月,观察修复体的颜色、形态、折裂、边缘密合度、基牙继发龋及邻接食物嵌塞的情况。结果　82颗修复体即刻满意度在85%以上。随访24个月中,失访4颗,78颗修复体形态和基牙继发龋方面均达到A级标准。1颗修复体轻微折裂,4颗出现邻接食物嵌塞,95%以上的修复体均达 A 级。结论　IPS e.max CAD全瓷髓高嵌体用于根管治疗的后牙短期修复效果良好。     

一步一步做好全瓷修复粘接

随着全瓷材料和微创修复理念的发展,全瓷修复体的临床应用日益广泛。粘接是影响全瓷修复成功的重要因素之一。良好的粘接不仅能为全瓷修复体提供固位和抗力,还能增强修复体边缘封闭、提高修复体美观效果。做好全瓷修复粘接需要3个重要环节:全瓷修复体组织面的粘接处理、预备体表面牙体硬组织的粘接处理以及根据修复体类型正确选择粘接用水门汀。     

一步一步做好全瓷修复粘接

随着全瓷材料和微创修复理念的发展,全瓷修复体的临床应用日益广泛。粘接是影响全瓷修复成功的重要因素之一。良好的粘接不仅能为全瓷修复体提供固位和抗力,还能增强修复体边缘封闭、提高修复体美观效果。做好全瓷修复粘接需要3个重要环节:全瓷修复体组织面的粘接处理、预备体表面牙体硬组织的粘接处理以及根据修复体类型正确选择粘接用水门汀。     

后牙大面积缺损椅旁CAD/CAM即刻修复效果

目的 观察牙体大面积缺损在根管治疗后,采用椅旁Cerec AC CAD/CAM即刻修复全瓷的短期临床效果。方法 选择大面积缺损的后牙,经完善根管治疗后牙体预备,通过应用Cerec AC椅旁CAD/CAM系统制作全瓷高嵌体,即刻上釉染色,双固化树脂水门汀粘接。即刻和6个月后评估全瓷修复的临床效果。结果 椅旁CAD/CAM系统制作的修复体外形全部达到A类标准,其他指标均超过90%,患者满意度高。结论 Cerec AC椅旁CAD/CAM系统快捷方便,能为后牙牙体缺损提供高质量、高美学的修复体。     

纤维分体桩高嵌体修复低牙合龈距后牙残冠的临床评价

目的:评价含有纤维分体桩的钴铬合金烤瓷高嵌体以及二氧化锆全瓷高嵌体修复低龈距后牙残冠的临床效果。方法:用含纤维分体桩的钴铬合金烤瓷高嵌体、二氧化锆全瓷高嵌体以及金合金分体桩高嵌体修复低龈距后牙残冠90个,修复后2周、6个月、24个月随访,对解剖形态、边缘适合性、边缘着色、表面质地、继发龋等临床修复效果进行评价。结果:3种分体桩高嵌体之间以及每种分体桩高嵌体于修复后2周、6个月、24个月之间在各评价项目上均无明显统计学差异(P≥0.05)。结论:应用含纤维分体桩的钴铬合金烤瓷高嵌体及二氧化锆全瓷高嵌体对低龈距后牙残冠进行修复,可获得与金合金分体桩高嵌体一样良好的临床修复效果;而且烤瓷和全瓷高嵌体更加美观,可适应不同层次的修复需求。     

CAD/CAM全瓷高嵌体微创修复根管治疗后牙体缺损的效果评价

目的：探讨CEREC计算机辅助设计与制作（computer aided design and computer aided manufacturing , CAD/CAM）全瓷高嵌体微创修复根管治疗后的后牙牙体缺损的临床疗效。方法选择126例大面积缺损的后牙,经过完善的根管治疗后,采用CEREC CAD/CAM全瓷高嵌体修复缺损牙冠,修复后即刻对患者进行满意度调查,术后即刻及1年后随访,均按照改良的美国公共卫生部（United States Public Health Service ,USPHS）标准对修复体进行临床评价。结果患者满意度在91%以上。根据改良USPHS标准,术后即刻及1年后复查时修复体边缘适合性达到A级分别为92.1％和91.3%（c2=0.052,P=0.820）,外形达A级前后两次均为97.6%,表面质地达到A级分别为95.2%和93.7%（c2=0.303,P=0.582）,颜色匹配达到A级分别为80.2%和81.7%（c2=0.103,P=0.748）。仅出现1例瓷破裂。结论 CEREC CAD/CAM全瓷高嵌体修复后牙牙体缺损效果良好,远期效果有待观察。     

In vitro fracture strength of endodontically treated premolars

The recent introduction of new bonding agents has led some authors to suggest that certain endodontically treated posterior teeth could be restored with a bonded restoration instead of a full-coverage crown or onlay. To test the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars restored with and without bonding agents, we randomly divided 56 intact and caries-free maxillary premolars into seven groups as follows: unaltered teeth; access only; MOD prep and RCT; MOD prep, RCT, and amalgam restoration; MOD prep, RCT, and amalgam with 4-META bonding agent; MOD prep, RCT, and composite resin restoration; and MOD prep, RCT, and composite resin with 4-META bonding agent. The teeth were subjected to compressive fracture tests in a Zwick 1435 Universal Testing Machine. Unaltered teeth and those with access only demonstrated similar fracture strengths. Under the conditions of this study, there was no significant difference in fracture strength between the experimental groups.     

上颌前磨牙根管治疗后MOD洞型不同修复方式对牙体抗力的影响

目的：使用不同方式修复上颌前磨牙牙体缺损后,比较牙体修复方式和材料对牙齿抗力的影响。方法：选择60颗单根上颌前磨牙,随机分为4组：A组,对照组;B组,复合树脂充填组;C组,复合树脂覆盖牙尖充填组;D组,聚合瓷嵌体覆盖牙尖修复组。完成所有的修复后,制备抗折强度检测试件。使用万能试验机进行压力试验,直到样本劈裂。每个样本劈裂时的压力及劈裂的类型,分别进行记录。结果：C组和D组的抗折强度明显高于B组（P〈0．05）,C组和D组抗折强度差别不明显。样本的劈裂形式四组存在差异,劈裂形式为Ⅱ型的比例D组低于C组。结论：覆盖牙尖的修复方式修复根管治疗后牙齿的大面积缺损（MOD洞型）,有利于提高牙齿的抗力;聚合瓷嵌体修复要优于复合树脂充填修复。     

A 3-year clinical evaluation of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with two different materials using the CEREC AC chair-side system

Statement of problem

The introduction of polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) materials may provide more options for dentists in restoring short clinical crowns and extensively damaged posterior teeth, but clinical data for their performance are lacking.

Targis高嵌体修复无髓后牙缺损的观察

目的：考察Targis瓷聚体作高嵌体修复无髓后牙缺损的临床效果。方法：对47例患者的53个经完善根管治疗术的后牙缺损，采用Targis高嵌体修复。根据改良的USPHS修复体评价标准，分别于修复后1、2,3年对Targis高嵌体进行随访复查。结果：Targis高嵌体的颜色协调性、边缘适合性和边缘着色在观察期内无明显改变，也未见继发龋和余留牙体的折裂，其累计成功率为94．3％。结论：Targis瓷聚体用于无髓后牙缺损的高嵌体修复效果良好，为牙体缺损的美观修复提供了新的选择，但其远期效果有待进一步观察。     

The influence of indirect bonded restorations on clinical prognosis of endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveThe loss of the dental coronal portion following carious lesions or fractures leads to endodontic treatment with subsequent restoration to ensure correct anatomy and function. Recently, partial adhesive restorations have been widely proposed to increase the survival rate of endodontically treated teeth. The primary purpose of this review is to assess the failure rate of indirect partial adhesive restorations on endodontically treated teeth (ETT), considering the follow-up period.MethodsThe indications reported in the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) were used to draft the present review. The study was constructed on PICO questions: population (patients who need indirect adhesive restorative treatment on endodontically treated teeth with onlay and overlay), intervention (onlay and overlay), control (patients with onlay and overlay on endodontically treated teeth) and outcome (failure rate and types of failure for onlay and overlay). The asked scientific question was: what are the failure rate and types of failure for adhesive indirect partial restorations on ETT?ResultsThe overall failure rate that emerges is 0.087 with a ratio of 121/1254, I² 80 % p-value< 0.001. Moreover, by meta-regression with covariates the follow-up period reports a coefficient of 0.013 with a P-value< 0.001. In conclusion, the indirect partial restorations on endodontically treated teeth displayed overall acceptable outcomes in terms of success from 2 to 4 years after their placement with only 4.32 % of failure. Failures increase after 7 years up to 12–30 years with failure rates of approximatively 10.65 % and 20.94 %. The analysis of the included articles reporting the causes of restorations failures showed that 15.51 % of cases were related to the loss of dental element.SignificanceBesides the survival rates of indirect adhesive restorations on endodontically treated posterior teeth, it was highlighted that the majority of failures appeared restorable. Thus, partial restorations seemed able to prevent the ETT tooth loss.     

Remaining tooth structure associated with various preparation designs for the endodontically treated maxillary second premolar

Existing literature suggests a relationship between the amount of remaining tooth structure and the fracture resistance of the restored endodontically treated tooth. This study investigated the amount of tooth structure remaining following various tooth preparations used in the restoration of the endodontically treated maxillary second premolar. Illustrations of the maxillary second premolar in buccopalatal, mesiodistal and occlusal sections were drawn to scale. Outlines of various intra- and extracoronal preparations were superim-posed on the illustrations to reveal the amount of tooth tissue remaining in each case. Preparations for a ceramic inlay, inlay with palatal cusp coverage and onlay left 2.0-2.5mm of tooth structure buccally and palatally. Following preparation for a metal-ceramic crown, approximately 1.0mm of tooth structure remained buccally, and between 1.6mm-1.8mm palatally. Preparation for an all-ceramic crown was observed to leave 1.0mm-1.2mm of tooth structure surrounding what remained of the endodontic access cavity. It was concluded that decisions as to the type of definitive restoration to restore the endodontically treated maxillary second premolar may be influenced, amongst other factors, by information on the amount of tooth tissue remaining following preparation.     

In vivo fractures of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with amalgam

Abstract The cumulative survival rate (retention of both cusps) and the fracture pattern of 1639 endodontically treated posterior teeth were assessed in a retrospective study. All teeth had an MO/DO or an MOD cavity restored with amalgam without cuspal overlays. The 20-year survival rate of teeth with an MO/ DO cavity was markedly higher than that of teeth with an MOD cavity. The lowest survival rate was found for the upper premolars with an MOD cavity: 28% of these teeth fractured within 3 years after endodontic therapy, 57% were lost after 10 years, and 73% after 20 years. Generally, the cusp most prone to fracture was the lingual one, and lingual fractures caused significantly more damage to the periodontal tissues than did facial or total crown fractures. The severity of periodontal damage increased with posterior location of the tooth. By far the most serious failures, irrespective of the cavity type, were found for the upper second molar, as 10 of 29 fractures led to extraction. It is concluded that amalgam, especially in MOD cavities, is an unacceptable material for restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth if used without cuspal overlays.