CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较IPS EmpressⅡ铸瓷嵌体、金合金嵌体、Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体这三种方法修复牙体缺损的效果，用复合树脂直接充填作为对照。方法选择142例患者197颗牙体缺损的磨牙，随机将其分为四组。应用IPS EmpressⅡ铸瓷嵌体47个、金合金嵌体47个、Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体50个、复合树脂直接充填53个。每六个月复查一次，采用美国公共健康协会（USPHS）标准评价各组疗效。结果三种嵌体在修复缺损效果上没有太大的差异性，都明显优于树脂填充。结论嵌体是较好的牙体缺损修复材料，与树脂相比更利于保持牙周的健康。
목적：비교IPS EmpressⅡ주자감체、금합금감체、Ceramage취합자감체저삼충방법수복아체결손적효과，용복합수지직접충전작위대조。방법선택142례환자197과아체결손적마아，수궤장기분위사조。응용IPS EmpressⅡ주자감체47개、금합금감체47개、Ceramage취합자감체50개、복합수지직접충전53개。매륙개월복사일차，채용미국공공건강협회（USPHS）표준평개각조료효。결과삼충감체재수복결손효과상몰유태대적차이성，도명현우우수지전충。결론감체시교호적아체결손수복재료，여수지상비경리우보지아주적건강。
Objective To evaluate the clinical performance of ceramic inlays, Au alloy inlays and polymeric porcelain inlays in restoring the molar defect.Methods According to the materials chosen by patients,197 cases selected with indications were divided into four groups:47 cases for ceramic inlays, 47 cases for Au alloy inlays, 50 cases for polymeric porcelain inlays and 53 cases for composite resin. All restorations were evaluated after half a year according to modified USPHS parameters.Results No statistically significant difference was shown for gingival status between three inlays,and there was significant difference between inlays groups and composite resin group.Conclusion It is an intriguing method using inlays to restore the molar defect,which is superior to restoration in the aspects of maintaining periodontal health.