离体前磨牙3种修复方法的抗力研究

›› 2018, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (11): 976-979.

离体前磨牙3种修复方法的抗力研究

陈顺昌¹,应智洋²,高铭艺²

1. 厦门长庚医院口腔科
2. 厦门长庚医院

收稿日期:2017-07-27 修回日期:2017-10-18 出版日期:2018-11-28 发布日期:2018-11-30
通讯作者: 陈顺昌 E-mail:13400611969@139.com

Fracture resistance of premolar teeth treated with different restored with three restorations

Received:2017-07-27 Revised:2017-10-18 Online:2018-11-28 Published:2018-11-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： ［摘要］目的探讨离体前磨牙根管充填后不同修复方法对牙体抗折性能的影响因素。方法60颗离体下颌前磨牙随机分为4组，A组为空白对照组，B、C、D组分别按同一标准根管治疗后，牙冠统一制备成近中洞型（MO）备用，B组采用复合树脂修复，C组采用全瓷嵌体修复，D组采用高强度纤维复合树脂修复。四组样本通过负荷加载（加载头与牙齿长轴呈135°，横梁位移速度1 mm/min），实验记录各样本折裂时的最大负荷值，并观察其折裂模式。结果 A组折裂负荷值最高(1 413.91±95.93)N，D组其次 (1324.66±88.56)N,B组折裂负荷值最低(796.57±118.85)N, C组(961.05±101.45)N, A组与D组负荷值差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,其余组间均有统计学差异（P＜0.05））；折裂模式D组与其它3组有统计学差异（P＜0.05），其余组间均无统计学差别（P>0.05）。结论高强度纤维复合树脂修复，可以明显提高修复体的折裂负荷值，折裂模式也更有优势。

关键词: 根管治疗，高强纤维，抗折强度

Abstract: Objective To explore the influence factors of three restoration methods on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated human premolar teeth. Methods 60 extracted human mandibular premolars with single canal were selected and randomly divided into 4 groups ( A，B，C，D)，Group A remained untreated and served as a control group. The other three groups were endodontically treated and a standardized MO cavity was prepared on each tooth. Over the standardized MO cavity, Group B was restored with composite resin, Group C with ceramicinlay，Group D with EverStick fiber and composite resin. The loading force under the direction at 135 degree to the long axis with crosshead speed of 1mm/min was applied to each tooth until the first sign of failure was noted. Data were recorded and analyzed statistically by SPSS 17.0 software. Results The median values of the samples were as follows: Group A(1413.91±95.93N) and Group D (1324.66±88.56N) were significantly higher than Group B(796.57±118.85N) and Group C(961.05±101.45N) (p<0.05). The incidences of repairable fracture mode were: A(80%), B(73.3%), C(73.3%), D(100%). Conclusion The use of EverStick high-strength fiber composite resin in premolar teeth with standardized MO cavities can significantly increase the fracture resistance and the fracture mode also has more advantages .

Key words: root canal treatment, high-strength fiber,fracture resistance

中图分类号:

R783.6

陈顺昌应智洋高铭艺. 离体前磨牙3种修复方法的抗力研究[J]. , 2018, 38(11): 976-979.

参考文献

[1]Gher ME Jr，Dunlap RM，Anderson MH，et al.Clinical survey of fractured teeth[J].J Am Dent Assoc, 1987, 114(2):174-
[2]Nothdurft FP，Seidel E，Gebhart F，et al.The fracture behaviorof premolar teeth with classⅡcavities restored by both directcomposite restorations and endodontic post systems[J].J Dent, 2008, 36(6):444-449
[3] 储婷，吴华英，陈亚明.聚乙烯纤维修复前磨牙近中邻面洞形的抗力研究[J].牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志, 2010，20(12)705-709
[4]张文君, 张冰玉.可塑纤维桩在口腔残根修复中的应用[J].中国实用药, 2010, 5(32):59-
[5]范丹妮, 李彦, 杜瑞钿.烤瓷贴面折裂及脱落原因分析[J].暨南大学学报:医学版, 2010, 4(31):194-196
[6]马红梅, 李阳, 陶世亮, 等.椅旁即刻全瓷修复短期疗效评价[J].口腔医学, 2014, 34(2):87-90
[7]王惠芸.我国人牙的测量和统计[J].中华口腔科杂志, 1959, 7(3):149-150
[8]. 赵铱民．口腔修复学［M］．7版．北京:人民卫生出版社，2012:151．
[9] Lassila LV, Garoushi S, Tanner J, et al.Adherence ofStreptococcus mutans to Fiber-Reinforced Filling Compositeand Conventional Restorative Materials[J].Open Dent J，2009, 3:227-232.
[10]Subramaniam P, Babu G, Sunny R.Glass fiber-reinforcedcomposite resin as a space maintainer: a clinical study[J].J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent, 2008; 26（Suppl 3）:S98-103.
[11]Yildiz C，Vanl?o lu BA，Evren B，et al.Fracture resistance ofmanually and CADCAM manufactured ceramic onlays[J].J Prosthodont, 2013, 22(7):537-542
[12]Ovul K, Arzu TM, Ahmet S, et al.Marginal adaptation and microleakeage of directly and indirectly made fiber reinforced composite inlays.Open Dent J.2011; 5:33-38.
[13] Turkaslan S, Tezvergil-Mutluay A.Intraoral repair of all ceramic fixed partial denture utilizing preimpregnated fiber reinforced composite.Eur J Dent.2008; 1(2):63-68.
[14] Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Norcini A, et al.Fiber-reinforcedcomposites in lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod.2005; 39(12):710-71
[15]Belli S，Erdemir A，Yildirim C.Reinforcement effect of polyethylene fiber in root filled teeth: comparison of two restorationtechniques[J].Int Endodo J, 2006, 39(2):136-142
[16]Sengun A，Cobankara FK，Orucoglu H.Effect of a new restorationtechnique on fracture resistance of endodontically treatedteeth[J].Dent Traumatol, 2008, 24(2):214-
[17]Hayashi M，Takahashi Y，Imazato Setal.Fracture resistanceof pulpless teeth restored with post-cores and crowns[J].DentMater, 2006, 22(5):477-485
[18]Santos MJMC, Freitas MC, Azevedo LM, et al.Clinicalevaluation Of ceramicinlaysandonlaysfabricated with two systems:12 with year follow with up[J].Clin Oral Investig, 2016, 20(7):1-8
[19]AygunEmirog, Lu EvrenB, KulakszkanY.Effect ofcementsat a total of different temperatures on the clinical performanceandmarginalad aptation of inlay with onlay restoration sinvivo[J].J Prosthodont, 2016, 25(4):302-309
[20]Tekce N, Pala K, Demirci M, et al.Influence of different composite materials and cavity preparation designs on the fracture resistance of mesio-occluso-distal inlay restoration[J].Dent Mater J, 2016, 35(3):523-531
[21]Yu W，Guo K，Zhang B，et al.Fracture resistance of endodonti?cally treated premolars restored with lithium disilicate CADCAM crowns or onlays and luted with two luting agents[J].Dent Mater J, 2014, 33(3):349-354
[22]Mynampati P，Babu MR，Saraswathi DD，et al.Comparison of fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated premolars with different esthetic onlay systems：An in vitro study[J].J Conserv Dent, 2015, 18(2):140-143