非创伤性充填治疗乳磨牙邻（牙合）面龋疗效观察

目的　评价非创伤性充填技术 (ART)治疗乳磨牙邻牙合面龋的临床疗效 ,并调查儿童对ART的接受程度。方法　选择双侧同名乳磨牙患邻牙合面龋的儿童 10 6例共 2 12颗牙。采用随机自身对照方法 ,其中一牙作为试验组采用ART技术用FX玻璃离子充填 ,另一牙为对照组常规备洞用银汞合金充填。治疗后 6个月、1年、2年随访复查。结果　试验组 2年的成功率为 78.30 % ,对照组的成功率为 6 8.87% ,两组间无显著性差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。试验组继发龋的发生率为 7.5 5 %明显低于对照组的 2 2 .6 4 % (P <0 .0 1)。 92 .4 5 %的患儿愿意接受ART方法治疗。结论　ART技术是治疗儿童龋病简便、有效的方法     

非创伤性充填治疗乳磨牙He路面龋疗效观察

目的 评价非创伤性充填技术(ART)治疗乳磨牙邻He面龋的临床疗效，并调查儿童对ART的接受程度。方法 选择双侧同名乳磨牙患邻He面龋的儿童106例共212颗牙。采用随机自身对照方法，其中一牙作为试验组采用ART技术用FX玻璃离子充填，另一牙为对照组常规备洞用银汞合金充填。治疗后6个月、1年、2年随访复查。结果 试验组2年的成功率为78．30％，对照组的成功率为68．87％，两组间无显著性差异(P＞0．05)。试验组继发龋的发生率为7．55％明显低于对照组的22．64％(P＜0．01)。92．45％的患儿愿意接受ART方法治疗。结论 ART技术是治疗儿童龋病简便、有效的方法。     

非创伤性充填技术治疗乳磨牙龋疗效观察

目的探讨非创伤性充填技术(ART)修复乳牙龋的疗效及儿童对ART的接受程度。方法选择患牙本质龋的乳牙580颗,分为3组,ART充填198颗,190颗牙作为对照进行银汞合金充填,192颗采用牙钻备洞,玻璃离子充填。1年及2年后复查。结果84.5%儿童使用ART治疗无不适感,91.2%的学生愿意使用ART方法进行治疗。ART组第1、2年的成功率(88.3%、76.0%)与银汞合金对照组(80.5%、71.3%)、牙钻玻璃离子组(89.9%,79.9%)无显著性差异。ART组及牙钻组2年继发龋发生率(10.55%与9.80%)低于银汞合金对照组(22.56%),差异有显著性。结论ART技术简单,效果较好,对于乳牙龋是一种有效的治疗方法。     

非创伤性充填龋坏乳牙效果观察

目的:探讨非创伤性充填技术(ART)修复乳牙龋的效果及儿童对ART的接受程度。方法:选取患牙本质龋的乳牙共305颗,试验组采用强度较高的玻璃离子(dentsply)完成ART充填154颗牙;对照组采用汞合金充填151颗牙。治疗后半年、1年、2年各复查1次。结果:¹试验组大部分患儿治疗中无不适感,93102%的患儿表示如果有龋坏牙愿意使用同样的方法治疗。º试验组两年的成功率(8417%、6911%)与对照组(7712%、6613%)相比无显著性差异。»试验组两年的继发龋发生率(6185%、912%)低于对照组(1619%、2115%),差异有显著性(P<0105)。结论:ART技术简单易学,对乳牙龋是一种有效的治疗方法。     

非创伤性技术充填乳牙两年的效果比较

目的：探索非创伤性充填（ART）方法修复乳牙龋坏的效果。方法：选取患牙本质龋的乳牙共454颗，分为3组，ART充填154颗，151颗牙作为对照进行汞合金充填，149颗采用钻备油，，玻璃离子充填。1年及2年后复查。结果；大部分儿童使用ART治疗无不适感，93.02％的学生表示如果有龋坏牙，愿意使用同样的方法进行治疗。ART组第1、2年的成功率（84.7％、69.1％）与汞合金对照组（77.1％、66.2％）、牙钻玻璃离子组（87.5％，74.9％）无显著性差异。使用玻璃离子材料的ART组及牙钻组两年继发龋发生率（6.85％、9.2％与6.35％、8.62％）低于汞合金对照组（16.9％、21.5％），差异有显著性。结论：ART技术简单易学，效果较好，对于乳牙龋坏是一种有效的治疗方法。     

绚彩复合体治疗儿童乳牙龋的临床研究

目的研究新型绚彩复合体Twinky Star对儿童乳牙龋病的临床治疗情况。方法根据患儿对充填材料的选择意愿进行分组：试验组568名乳牙龋齿患儿采用绚彩复合体Twinky Star充填,对照组814名乳牙龋齿患儿采用Filtek Z250树脂充填,调查2组患儿的就诊行为表现以及半年后患牙充填物脱落率、继发龋发生率及牙髓活力。结果试验组充填治疗的接受率为55.28%,对照组充填治疗接受率为47.05%,差异有统计学意义（χ2=9.07,P=0.00）。试验组568名患儿中,392名于半年后复诊,充填物脱落的有7名,占回访人数的1.79%;2名为充填物边缘封闭不良,有继发龋产生,占回访人数的0.51%。对照组814名患儿中,556名于半年后复诊,充填物脱落的有2名,占回访人数的0.36%;发生继发龋的有4名,占回访人数的0.72%;有牙髓症状的患者有1名。结论新型绚彩复合体易于被患儿接受,临床治疗效果好,可以进一步在临床上推广使用。     

ART技术充填第一恒磨牙浅、中龋的近期疗效观察

目的 比较非创伤修复治疗（atraumatic restorative treatment,ART）与传统银汞合金充填第一恒磨牙He面、颊面浅中龋的治疗效果。方法 对初一学生203颗第一恒磨牙浅中龋进行ART修复，对199颗同年龋组的第一恒磨牙标准备洞后进行银汞合金充填。结果 ART修复10个月后复查，成功率为94.08%；传统银汞合金充填10个月后成功率为97.47%，两组间无显著差异（P＞0.05）。结论 ART是一种较好的龋病治疗方法，可避免汞污染，不受诊疗条件的限制，利于社区、农村、学校推广，提高龋病充填率。     

乳牙龋损无损伤性修复技术的临床应用

目的 选择适合儿童的无损伤性修复(atraumatic restorative tractment,ART)技术,评价ART技术修复乳牙龋损的效果。方法 89例118颗乳牙龋洞,采用ART技术修复,用玻璃离子水门汀充填窝洞。1年后复查充填物情况。结果 根据标准判断105颗牙为成功,成功率为88.98％;失败13颗,占11.02％,主要见于充填物边缘缺损、磨损及脱落。结论 ART技术是一种只用手动器械去除龋坏组织,并用黏接性修复材料修复龋洞的治疗技术,在预防和治疗早期龋损中具有实用价值。     

ART在老年人楔状缺损及根面龋的应用研究

目的 评价ART技术（非创伤修复技术）治疗老年人楔状缺损和牙根面龋的效果。方法 实验组：严格按照ART手册操作程序进行ART充填；对照1组；使用简单旋转器械和ART专用玻璃离子充填；对照2组；使用简单旋转器械和国产玻璃离子充填（仅对楔状缺损组实施）。结果 在楔状缺损治疗中，实验组与对照2组1年后成功率有显著性差异。其余均无差异。结论 使用改进的，粘接性更好的材料，ART方法能够代替传统方法治疗老年人楔状缺损和牙根面龋。     

非创伤性充填技术治疗乳磨牙龋病的临床评价

目的评价非创伤性充填技术(ART)修复乳磨牙龋病的效果。方法选取珠海市区的小学一、二年级6—8岁117名学生作为观察对象，在2个月内应用非创性充填技术充填256颗乳磨牙，并作了1年的观察。结果Ⅰ类洞94颗成功，成功率87．04％；Ⅱ类洞102颗成功，成功率68．92％。失败主要为充填物边缘缺损、磨损及脱落。结论ART技术对小学生乳磨牙龋坏早期治疗有实用性价值。并适合于在群体预防应用。     

ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children--results after three years

OBJECTIVES: These were to assess whether ART restorations and sealants could be provided to children in a school environment in China, to assess patient acceptability of the ART approach, and to evaluate on a longitudinal basis the treatments performed. METHODS: This study was conducted in Deyang, Sichuan Province, in western China. A total of 294 ART restorations were placed in 197 children and 191 fissure sealants were placed in 140 children by five middle-level dentists in four secondary schools. Standard instruments and procedures for ART were used. The restorative material used was a high-strength glass-ionomer (Ketac-Molar, ESPE). The treatments were evaluated annually after placement by the same examiner who had not been involved in the placement of the restorations nor sealants using explorers and mouth-mirrors. At the 3-year examination an independent external examiner evaluated the restorations using USPHS criteria. RESULTS: Most of the children did not report discomfort during treatment and 92% were willing to receive ART restorations again. The cumulative 1-year and 3-year survival rates of small Class I restorations were 99% and 92% respectively. The corresponding figures for large Class I restorations were 90% and 77%. After 3 years, 72% of the sealants were either partially or completely retained. Only 2% of the sealed teeth developed fissure caries and these involved teeth where the sealants had been lost. Similar success rates were found using USPHS criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The ART approach for preventing and treating tooth decay in Chinese school children was shown to be appropriate, effective and acceptable. The 3-year survival rates of the restorations were high but were related to the size and type of the restoration.     

无创伤性修复治疗技术修复乳牙一年后效果观察

目的评价无创伤性修复治疗技术(ART)用于防治儿童乳牙龋损的效果和可接受性.方法采用无创伤性修复治疗技术完成258颗乳牙单面洞和172颗乳牙复面洞的修复治疗,一年后复查ART修复体.结果单面洞ART修复的成功率明显高于复面洞(P＜0.05),成功率分别为87.8%,68.9%.ART修复一颗乳牙单面洞的平均时间为16.2分钟,一颗乳牙复面洞的平均时间为28.1分钟.7.5%的儿童修复治疗后有不适的主诉.92.2%的儿童愿意接受ART治疗.结论ART是一种简便易行、经济有效的治疗技术,可以在口腔医师的指导下,由经过培训的基层口腔保健人员进行操作完成.     

采用ART技术封闭恒牙防龋的6年临床效果观察

目的:评价非创伤性充填(ART)技术对恒牙窝沟封闭后,封闭剂保留及新生龋损发生情况。方法:1996年在四川省德阳市4所中学选取12～13岁儿童140名作191个牙ART封闭。采用WHO的ART标准器械,德国ESPE公司生产的高强度玻璃离子材料,对选择的牙面窝沟进行封闭;操作者为经中等口腔专业训练的医生。封闭后每年对ART封闭及牙龋损情况进行评价。结果:封闭后1、2、4、6年的完整保留率分别为75.4%、62.5%、50.0%、34.6%;成功率分别为89.6%、78.8%、68.5%、57.9%。试验后1年没有新生龋牙的发生,试验后2、3年,龋患发生率分别为1.6%、2.8%。试验后4年龋病有明显增加,试验4、5、6年后,龋病发生率分别为8.5%、16.1%、15.0%。结论:ART封闭试验3年的保存率较高、新生龋发生率低;试验6年封闭剂保留率虽然有所降低,但其结果还是令人满意的,预防龋病的效果是显著的。但封闭物脱落3年后,若没有重新修复,新龋患率大幅度上升,作为恒牙龋病防治的措施是适合和可接受的;是一种适合于在学校、社区开展的有效、实用的龋病预防方法。     

Ten-year survival of ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth

This study evaluated the 10-year clinical performance of high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement placed in posterior permanent teeth by means of the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach. One operator placed 167 single- and 107 multiple-surface restorations in 43 high-risk caries pregnant women (mean decayed teeth = 9.8 ± 5.5). Examinations were performed at 1-, 2-, and 10-year intervals according to ART criteria. In the last evaluation, the US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria were also used. After 10 years, 129 restorations (47.1%) were evaluated and achieved a cumulative survival rate of 49.0% (SE 7.2%). The 10-year survival of single- and multiple-surface ART restorations assessed using the ART criteria were 65.2% (SE 7.3%) and 30.6% (SE 9.9%), respectively. This difference was significant (jackknife SE of difference; p < 0.05). Using the USPHS criteria, the 10-year survival of single- and multiple-surface ART restorations were 86.5% and 57.6%, respectively. The primary causes of failure were total loss (9.3%) and marginal defects (5.4%). The survival rates observed, especially for the single-surface restorations, confirm the potential of the ART approach for restoring and saving posterior permanent teeth.     

The 3.5-year survival rates of primary molars treated according to three treatment protocols: a controlled clinical trial

Objectives

This study aimed to test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the survival rates of molars treated according to the conventional restorative treatment (CRT) using amalgam, atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) using high-viscosity glass ionomer, and ultraconservative treatment (UCT) protocol after 3.5 years.

Materials and methods

Cavitated primary molars were treated according to CRT, ART, and UCT (small cavities were restored with ART and medium/large cavities were daily cleaned with toothpaste/toothbrush under supervision). Molar extractions resulting from toothache, sepsis, or pulp exposure were failures. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate the survival curves.

Results

The numbers of treated teeth, among the 302 6–7-year-old children, were 341 (CRT), 244 (ART), and 281 (for UCT group: 109 small ART, 166 open cavities, and 6 combinations). Protocol groups were similar at baseline regarding gender and mean decayed missing filled tooth score, but not regarding age and type of surface. The numbers of molars extracted were 22 (CRT), 16 (ART), and 26 (UCT). Fistulae were most often recorded. After 3.5 years, the cumulative survival rate?±?standard error for all molars treated was 90.9?±?2.0 % with CRT, 90.4?±?2.4 % with ART, and 88.6?±?1.9 % with UCT (p?=?0.13). Only a type of surface effect was observed over the 3.5-year period: survival rates for molars were higher for single- than for multiple-surface cavities.

Conclusion

There was no difference in the cumulative survival rates of primary molars treated according to the CRT, ART, and UCT protocols over a 3.5-year period.

Clinical relevance

Keeping cavities in primary molars biofilm-free might be another treatment option alongside restoring such cavities through conventional and ART protocols.     

Effectiveness of glass-ionomer (ART) and amalgam restorations in the deciduous dentition: results after 3 years

This study compared the survival of restorations produced through the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach using glass-ionomer with those produced through the traditional approach using amalgam (MTA) in deciduous dentitions over a period of 3 years. Using a parallel group design, 835 grade 1 children, aged 6-7 years, participated. A total of 482 children were treated through the ART and 353 children through the MTA approach. Eight dentists produced a total of 1891 single- and multiple-surface restorations. After 3 years, 22.1% of the restorations were lost for evaluation. There was a statistically significant difference in the combined survival of all single- and multiple-surface restorations between the two approaches in favour of the ART approach (p = 0.04). The study revealed a 3-year cumulative survival percentage of single-surface ART and MTA restorations of 86.1 and 79.6%, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.03). The main reasons for both single-surface ART and MTA restorations to fail was 'restoration missing' followed by 'gross marginal defect'. The 3-year cumulative survival percentages of multiple-surface ART and MTA restorations were 48.7 and 42.9%, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The 3-year survival percentages of single- and multiple- surface ART and MTA restorations varied widely amongst the 8 operators with an operator effect (p = 0.001) for multiple-surface MTA restorations. It can be concluded that the ART approach using glass-ionomer yielded better results in treating dentinal lesions in deciduous teeth than did the traditional approach using amalgam after 3 years. It is recommended to select the ART approach to complement the other activities of the school oral health programme.     

Clinical evaluation of the ART approach and materials in peri-urban farm schools of the Johannesburg area.

In this study, 1,325 school children from 7 farm schools were examined. Their mean age (+/- SD) was 10.5 +/- 3.0 (range 6-11) years. At baseline, the mean DMFT score was 1.1 +/- 1.7 and 36.4% of the children had caries. The prevalence of fluorosis among the children was 12.6%. Curative treatment was offered to all the children. A total of 113 children (8.5%) with one-surface cavities on permanent teeth and without fluorosis were treated using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach. A total number of 163 cavities were included in the study, of which 82 were treated with Fuji IX glass-ionomer cement and 81 with Ketac-MOLAR (hand mix). One year after treatment, restoration and sealant parts of ART fillings were examined. Caries status was also determined. The placing of the ART fillings and their evaluation were performed by different practitioners. A total number of 108 restorations (58 with Fuji IX, 50 with Ketac-MOLAR) were evaluated. Results of ART fillings showed a survival rate of 93.1% with Fuji and 94.0% with Ketac-MOLAR. Retention of the sealant parts of ART fillings was observed in 81% of restorations with Fuji IX and 76% with Ketac-MOLAR, not connected to the filled cavity. Caries was absent on all teeth restored with Fuji IX and noted in only one tooth restored with Ketac-MOLAR, not connected to the filled cavity. The retention rate after a 12-month period was acceptable and ART approach proved to be an appropriate technique for restoring teeth in this population group. There were no statistically significant differences between the survival rates of the two glass-ionomer restorative materials (P > 0.05).     

非创伤性治疗技术充填和窝沟封闭年轻恒牙2年效果观察

评价非创伤性治疗技术充填和窝沟封闭的效果及其可接受性,探索适合我国学校和农村开展龋病防治的方法。方法采用德国ＥＰＳＥ公司生产的Ｋｅｔａｃ－Ｍｏｌａｒ玻璃离子材料完成４８６颗受试牙的充填和窝沟封闭,治疗后１年、２年复查,记录ＡＲＴ充填体,封闭物及继发龋坏情况。     

Survival of self-etch adhesive Class II composite restorations using ART and conventional cavity preparations in primary molars

PURPOSE: To test the null-hypothesis that there was no difference in the survival percentages of Class II composite restorations in primary teeth produced through either ART or conventional approaches after 2 years. METHODS: 157 children with 325 Class II cavitated dentin lesions were included in a split-mouth study design. A computer program randomly assigned cavitated dentin lesions to treatment groups stratified for gender, operator, upper/lower jaw and left/right side of the mouth. Three operators placed resin composite (Pertac II) restorations using a self-etch adhesive (Prompt L-Pop). Two independent examiners evaluated the restorations after 0.5, 1 and 2 years using the modified Ryge criteria. A modification of the actuarial survival method was applied to estimate survival percentages. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) observed between the cumulative survival percentages of Class II composite restorations in primary teeth produced by the two approaches after 2 years (ART: 34.9% +/- 4.7%; conventional: 35.1% +/- 4.7%). The cumulative survival percentages of ART and conventional Class II restorations of one of the operators were lower than for ART restorations of the other two operators and for conventional restorations of one of the operators (P < or = 0.001). The main reason for Class II composite restorations to fail over the 2-year period was complete loss of retention; ART: 75%; conventional: 77%. The null-hypothesis was accepted as there was no difference in the cumulative survival percentages of ART and conventional Class II composite restorations in primary teeth after 2 years. It appears that the low survival results obtained may have been caused by poor bonding of the self-etch adhesive.