两种不同材料的瓷嵌体用于后牙修复的临床效果比较

目的 比较在计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制作(CAD/CAM)下IPS e.max全瓷高嵌体及LavaUltimate优韧瓷高嵌体用于修复后牙缺损的临床治疗效果。方法 临床完成IPS e.max全瓷高嵌体75个，LavaUltimate优韧瓷高嵌体62个，随访观察6个月、1年、2年、3年，参考美国公共健康会（USPHS）标准,对其临床效果进行观察。结果 IPSe.max全瓷高嵌体的颜色优于LavaUltimate优韧瓷高嵌体；而Lava Ultimate优韧瓷高嵌体的修复体完整性优于IPS e.max全瓷高瓷嵌体。结论 两种材料瓷嵌体用于后牙修复的临床效果没有显著差异，优选哪种材料取决于患者的喜好。关注修复体完整性的患者建议优选Lava Ultimate优韧瓷，关注高嵌体的颜色的患者建议优选IPSe.max全瓷。

Clinical evaluation of restoring posterior teeth with porcelain onlays produced using two different materials

Objective To evaluate the clinical performance of IPS e.max all-ceramic onlay and Lava Ultimate toughness porcelain onlays in restoring the posterior teeth with CAD/CAM. Methods Seventy-five posterior teeth were restored with IPS e.max all-ceramic onlays, and sixty-two posterior teeth were restored with Lava Ultimate toughness porcelain onlays. All restorations were evaluated at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years according to modified USPHS parameters. Results The color shade of IPS e.max all-ceramic onlays were superior to those of Lava Ultimate toughness porcelain onlays. However, the integrity of restoration using Lava Ultimate toughness porcelain onlays was better than those of IPS e.max all-ceramic onlays. Conclusions There is no significant difference in the clinical effect of the two materials for posterior tooth restoration, which material is preferred depends on the patient''s preference, Lava Ultimate is preferred for patients who are concerned about the integrity; while IPSe.max is preferred for patients who are concerned about the color of the onlay.