嵌体修复牙体组织缺损过程中的护理

用银汞合金修复牙体缺损由来已久,但由于其性能的限制,对于修复后牙严重缺损者,仍存在一些不足,如牙体或修复体易折裂、边缘易出现继发龋等。嵌体是一种嵌入牙体内部,用以恢复牙体形态和功能的修复体。用嵌体修复后牙邻牙合面洞,由于嵌体为整体铸造完成的修复体,本身折裂几乎不可能;另外,具有良好的边缘封闭性和咬合接触关系,还可免除汞污染,近年在牙体组织缺损修复中得到越来越广泛的应用。嵌体的制作包括以下几个步骤:医生根据嵌体的适应证选择患牙,进行基牙预备、取模、倒模,嵌体的技工制作、试戴,黏结。在这几个步骤中,除了嵌体的技工制…     

复合树脂嵌体修复牙体缺损3年疗效观察

目的：观察复合树脂嵌体远期疗效。方法：用光固化复合树脂制成嵌体用于牙体I、Ⅱ、Ⅴ类洞的充填,并以单纯光固化复合树脂充填作为对照,观察3年疗效。结果：嵌体组515例,复查285例,成功率93.33%;对照组651例,复查362例,成功率67.68%。结论：复合树脂嵌体具有很好的远期疗效,是一种较好的新型牙体修复体。     

铸造嵌体部分冠修复后牙牙体缺损

对后牙牙体大面积缺损,如果用全冠修复,切割牙体组织过多,设计采用铸造嵌体部分冠修复,可尽可能地保存残留牙体组织,修复效果满意．铸造嵌体部分冠要求覆盖包括牙冠面在内的２～４个牙面,利用针道辅助固位．此种修复体切割牙体组织较少,固位效果好,可根据患牙具体灵活设计。     

金合金嵌体在磨牙牙体缺损修复中的临床应用

选择2008年1月至2012年12月在本诊所就诊患者102例,共130颗磨牙（第一磨牙83颗,第二磨牙47颗）。其中男性42例,女性60例,年龄2l-64岁,平均43岁。     

后牙牙体缺损瓷聚合体嵌体修复的治疗体会

牙体缺损表现为硬组织不同程度的破坏、缺损,造成牙体形态、咬合和邻接关系的异常,影响牙髓、牙周组织健康,因此,修复牙体缺损,除了必须解除牙体缺损的病因、治疗病变外,正确地恢复牙齿的形态与功能是首要的。传统的方法是银汞永久充填法。但是,随着人们生活水准的快速提?..     

空核桩冠一体化修复牙体缺损的方法

对于后牙的大面积缺损，一般可以采用制作嵌体或全冠的方法进行修复。当后牙的临床牙冠过短，缺损面积较大，残余牙体为薄壁，不能为嵌体提供足够的抗力；或者由于长期的牙体大面积缺损形成残冠导致对颌牙过度伸长，此时的牙体缺损修复难度较大，为此我们采用了一种新的修复方法——空核桩冠一体化修复法。     

冠及嵌体修复后牙牙体缺损的临床疗效观察

后牙牙体缺损是牙体硬组织的常见病、多发病,目前临床有多种修复治疗方式,包括冠、嵌体、充填等,但对冠和嵌体这二种修复方式的成功率及比较报道较少。自1997年以来,我们对450例后牙牙体缺损的患者进行修复,并对修复满3年的病例进行随访观察,对远期疗效进行了比较。1材料与方法     

后牙复合树脂嵌体在牙体修复中的临床应用

1998年以来，应用复合树脂嵌体对215例牙体缺损患牙（主要用于[牙合]面洞、邻[牙合]面洞、牙颈部洞，要求患牙具有足够的健康牙体组织）进行充填修复，其中男112例，女103例，年龄18～60岁，报道如下。     

新塑钢嵌体修复后牙缺损的临床应用

新塑钢嵌体修复后牙缺损的临床应用何玉林，陈必胜上海第二军医大学长征医院（２００００３）由于美学因素、汞对牙科人员的毒性和对环境的污染，学者们一直在寻找银汞合金充填物的替代材料。复合树脂由于其美观效果而被用于后牙修复。但复合树脂材料也有一些缺陷，如边缘...     

瓷修复技术的临床应用Ⅷ.瓷嵌体的临床应用

瓷嵌体是一种嵌入牙体内部以恢复缺损牙体形态和功能的瓷修复体.由于其具有极佳的生物相容性和美学效果、良好的耐腐蚀性和耐磨损性,以及边缘密合性高,邻面可高度抛光形成良好的邻接关系等优点,目前瓷嵌体的临床应用越来越广泛.     

复合树脂嵌体的研究进展及应用现状

复合树脂嵌体也称间接性树脂修复,是由含有双甲基丙烯酸酯基类的复合树脂在体外固化制作而成。体外固化过程释放了复合树脂嵌体的聚合收缩应力,使修复体的聚合收缩局限在粘接层内;同时提高了复合树脂的聚合程度,提升了其机械性能。同样,由于复合树脂嵌体有体外操作过程,因此在解剖形态方面更佳,有着相比直接树脂充填更良好的邻面接触和面形态。相比瓷嵌体,复合树脂嵌体有着修补方便,不磨耗对牙等特点。随着复合树脂材料及树脂粘接材料的更新,复合树脂嵌体的性能如抗折裂强度、边缘微渗漏、硬度及耐磨性等方面得以提高,复合树脂嵌体在临床方面的应用逐渐广泛,不仅限于牙体严重缺损活髓牙的修复,在完成牙髓治疗后的牙齿、隐裂牙、重度磨损牙等疾患中均有应用。本文就近年来复合树脂嵌体的性能研究及临床应用现状作一综述。     

有限元法在嵌体修复中的应用现状和研究进展

随着目前嵌体材料和加工制作技术的发展以及牙体缺损修复理念的改变,嵌体已重新成为牙体缺损保存修复的首选之一.有限元法是借助计算机进行的力学数值计算方法,它可迅速有效地建立牙体修复模型,并模拟牙体的受力情况对牙体各个部位进行应力分析,为临床治疗提供了依据.其计算结果与实际结果有较好的一致性,已被广泛运用到口腔医学领域中,对口腔生物力学的发展起了巨大的推动作用.本文就有限元法在嵌体修复中的应用现状和研究进展作一综述.     

计算机辅助设计与制作切削支架在无牙颌种植固定修复中应用研究进展

早期无牙颌种植固定修复主要由铸造贵金属以及普通金属支架构成,加工技术受多种因素影响。随着数字化技术及材料的发展,计算机切削支架的制作更加便利、高效,并能满足各式复杂的无牙颌种植重建需求。因此该文将从计算机辅助设计与制作（computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing）切削支架的临床应用优势以及常见的无牙颌种植固定修复切削支架设计要点进行总结。     

Fracture resistance of prepared teeth restored with bonded inlay restorations

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: intact, prepared, and restored human maxillary premolars. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty intact, noncarious human maxillary premolars were divided into 5 groups of 10 and were mounted with their roots imbedded in autopolymerized acrylic. In the first group, the teeth were intact with no preparation. In the other 4 groups, Class II MOD preparations were made with a water-cooled high-speed hand piece. In 1 group, the cavity preparations were restored with bonded CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. In 2 groups, the preparations were restored with bonded CAD/CAM composite inlays (acid etched or air particle abraded). In the final group, the teeth were prepared but unrestored. Specimens were tested individually in a universal testing machine, in which a 4.82-mm-diameter steel sphere plunger was mounted in the crosshead moving at 0.5 mm/min. The plunger contacted the facial and lingual triangular ridges beyond the margins of the restorations. Peak load to fracture (N) was measured for each specimen. Means were calculated and analyzed with analysis of variance (P相似文献   

A clinical comparison of resin composite inlay and onlay posterior restorations and cast-gold restorations at 7 years.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of Concept indirect posterior heat- and pressure-polymerized restorative material and compare it to the performance of cast gold. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Inlays and onlays placed in a standardized manner as part of a clinical study were evaluated at 7 years. Eighteen patients (45%) who had received 36 Concept restorations returned and were evaluated using the US Public Health Service criteria. Restorations were evaluated in seven categories as the percentage receiving Alfa (ideal), Bravo (clinically acceptable), or Charlie (clinically unacceptable) scores or as restoration no longer present. Fourteen of the restorations were cemented with Heliobond bonding resin and 13 were cemented with Special Bond bonding resin. Each patient also received a cast-gold restoration for comparison. RESULTS: Concept restorations received scores of Alfa at the following rates: color match, 64%; interfacial staining, 47%; secondary caries, 75%; wear, 58%; marginal integrity, 64%; surface texture, 72%; and axial contour, 58% (in 14% this category was not applicable because they were Class I restorations). Nine Concept restorations (25%) were no longer present. Fifteen of 18 gold restorations were present at this recall. Statistical analysis indicated no significant differences in any categories between the two bonding resins used with Concept restorative material and the gold restorations. CONCLUSION: At 7 years in vivo, the Concept indirect posterior restorative system yields clinically acceptable restorations, particularly in premolars.