| 白 琴,高锦瑜,韦彦锋,张文娟,王 帅.双线排龈法在烤瓷冠修复牙体缺损中的临床应用[J].,2018,(20):3941-3944 |
| 双线排龈法在烤瓷冠修复牙体缺损中的临床应用 |
| Clinical Application of Double Line Gingival Retraction Method for the Restoration of Tooth defect with PFM Crown |
| 投稿时间：2018-03-05 修订日期：2018-03-30 |
| DOI：10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2018.20.032 |
| 中文关键词: 双线排龈法 单线排龈法 烤瓷冠 牙体缺损 |
| 英文关键词: Double line gingival retraction method Single row gingival retraction method PFM crown Tooth defect |
| 基金项目:延安大学咸阳医院科研项目（2015082607） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 593 |
| 全文下载次数: 238 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 摘要 目的：探讨双线排龈法在烤瓷冠修复牙体缺损中的临床应用效果，为临床提供参考。方法：选择2014年3月至2016年3月来我院拟行烤瓷冠修复的96例患者，按照患者入院顺序交替分为观察组和对照组，每组48例。观察组48例(56颗牙)采用双线排龈法，对照组48例(52颗牙)采用单线排龈法，观察和比较两组的排龈效果及随访24周的基牙与游离龈是否完全排开，龈沟宽度是否合适，牙体预备后肩台的边缘是否清晰、连续，印模肩台是否清晰、连续，有无气泡，模型是否清晰、光滑，牙龈有无渗血等。结果：观察组基牙与游离龈排开不全、印模肩台不清晰不连续或有气泡、模型不清晰不光滑、牙龈渗血的发生率均显著低于对照组(P＜0.05)。修复后24周，两组的修复体边缘隐蔽性比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)，观察组0级牙数为52颗(92.9%)，对照组0级牙数为41(80.8%)，观察组的牙周组织情况明显优于对照组(P＜0.05)。结论：在前牙烤瓷冠修复中应用双线排龈法的排龈效果较单线排龈法更好。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the clinical application of double line gingival retraction method for the restoration of tooth defect with PFM crown, and provide references for the clinic. Methods: From March 2014 to March 2016, 96 cases of patients undergoing PFM in our hospital were selected and divided into the observation group and the control group according to the order of admission with 48 cases in each group. The observation group(56 teeth) was given double retraction, while the control group (52 teeth) was given single retraction, the teeth gingival retraction effect and situation of gingival line, gingival sulcus width, tooth after the shoulder edge, shoulder impression, bleeding gums were compared between two groups. Results: The incidence of unequal abutment and free gingival, unclear discontinuous or bubble-shaped impression shoulder, not clear nor smooth model and gingival blood oozing in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group(P<0.05). At 24 weeks after repair, there was no significant difference in the marginal concealment of the restorations between the two groups (P>0.05), the number of teeth with grage 0 in the observation group were 52 (92.9%) and 41 (80.8%) in the observation group and control group, which was significantly better in the observation group than that of the control group(P<0.05). Conclusion: Double line gingival retraction method was better for the anterior teeth porcelain crown restoration than single line gingival retraction method. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
