CAJ | 학술논문

目的研究Cerec 3D/Inlab MC XL系统不同光学印模法对Cerec Blocs全瓷冠边缘和内部适合性的影响.方法制备1个右侧下颌第一磨牙全冠预备体模型,复制32个石膏代型.采用随机抽样法,16个代型用于冠粘接,16个代型用于光学印模采集,其中直接法和间接法各选取8个,分别制作8个Cerec Blocs全瓷冠.采用修正美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)标准和扫描电镜CSEM)法评价冠的适合性,SAS 9.1软件对实验数据进行统计分析.结果修正USPHS法显示87.5%的边缘测试点临床可按受,直接法与间接法边缘适合性比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);SEM法显示所有冠的边缘测试点均小于120μm,直接法与间接法边缘和内部适合性比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但直接法在近中、颊面、舌面、骀面的适合性优于间接法(P<0.05);直接法远中轴面适合性较差,与近中轴面比较筹异有统计学意义(P<0.01).结论光学印模法对Cerec Blocs冠边缘适合性无影响,但对内部适合性有一定影响,全瓷冠边缘适合性均在临床可接受范围内.
목적 연구Cerec 3D/Inlab MC XL계통불동광학인모법대Cerec Blocs전자관변연화내부괄합성적영향.방법 제비1개우측하합제일마아전관예비체모형,복제32개석고대형.채용수궤추양법,16개대형용우관점접,16개대형용우광학인모채집,기중직접법화간접법각선취8개,분별제작8개Cerec Blocs전자관.채용수정미국공공위생복무(USPHS)표준화소묘전경CSEM)법평개관적괄합성,SAS 9.1연건대실험수거진행통계분석.결과 수정USPHS법현시87.5%적변연측시점림상가안수,직접법여간접법변연괄합성비교차이무통계학의의(P>0.05);SEM법현시소유관적변연측시점균소우120μm,직접법여간접법변연화내부괄합성비교차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05),단직접법재근중、협면、설면、태면적괄합성우우간접법(P<0.05);직접법원중축면괄합성교차,여근중축면비교주이유통계학의의(P<0.01).결론 광학인모법대Cerec Blocs관변연괄합성무영향,단대내부괄합성유일정영향,전자관변연괄합성균재림상가접수범위내.
Objective To study the effect of different optical impression methods in Cerec 3D/Inlab MC XL system on marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic crowns. Methods A right mandibular first molar in the standard model was used to prepare full crown and replicated into thirty-two plaster casts. Sixteen of them were selected randomly for bonding crown and the others were used for taking optical impression, in half of which the direct optical impres sion taking method were used and the others were used for the indirect method, and then eight Cerec Blocs all-ceramic crowns were manufactured respectively. The fit of all-ceramic crowns were evaluated by modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria and scanning electron microscope (SEM) imaging, and the data were statistically analyzed with SAS 9.1 software. Results The clinically acceptable rate for all marginal measurement sites was 87.5% according to USPHS criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in marginal fit between direct and indi rect method group (P>0.05). With SEM imaging, all marginal measurement sites were less than 120μm and no statistically significant difference was found between direct and indirect method group in terms of marginal or internal fit (P> 0.05). But the direct method group showed better fit than indirect method group in terms of mesial surface, lingual surface, buccal surface and occlusal surface (P<0.05). The distal surface's fit was worse and the obvious differ ence was observed between mesial surface and distal surface in direct method group (P<0.01). Conclusion Under the conditions of this study, the optical impression method had no significant effect on marginal fit of Cerec Blocs crowns, but it had certain effect on internal fit. Overall all-ceramic crowns appeared to have clinically acceptable marginal fit.