Objective To compare and analyze the effect of Ceramage polymeric inlays and CEREC lithium silicate glass inlays on the repair of large area defects after posterior root canal therapy. Methods One hundred cases (110 teeth) with large defect of posterior teeth diagnosed from January 2015 to June 2016 were randomly divided into two groups: Ceramage group and CEREC group. All patients were followed up for 12 months. Group repair instantly, repair 12 months after the repair effect. Results Immediately after repair, the color success rates of repaired body in 12 months after repair were 94.34% and 96.23% in CEREC group, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in Ceramage group (80.70%,82.46%,P<0.05) There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in the surface abrasion,edge coloring, retention of the prosthesis,secondary caries, intact teeth, close margin and success rate of periodontal status in 12 months. Conclusion Ceramage polymer inlay and CEREC lithium silicate glass inlay are effective in repairing large area defects after root canal treatment of the posterior teeth. Compared with Ceramage, CEREC lithium silicate glass ceramics are highly embedded Body in the restoration of color has obvious advantages.%目的:比较分析Ceramage聚合瓷高嵌体与瓷睿刻(CEREC)二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷高嵌体对后牙根管治疗后大面积缺损的修复效果.方法:选择2015年1月-2016年6月笔者科室诊治的后牙牙体大面积缺损患者100例(共110颗牙),随机将其分为Ceramage组与CEREC组,均行12个月的随访观察,比较两组修复后即刻、修复后12个月的效果.结果:CEREC组修复即刻、修复后12个月修复体颜色成功率分别为94.34%、96.23%,均显著高于Ceramage组的80.70%、82.46%(P<0.05);但两组在修复即刻、修复后12个月修复体的表面磨耗、边缘着色、修复体固位、继发龋、牙齿完整、边缘密合、牙周状态成功率等方面均无明显差异(P>0.05).结论:Ceramage聚合瓷高嵌体、CEREC二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷高嵌体在后牙根管治疗后大面积缺损中修复效果均较好,但CEREC二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷高嵌体在修复体颜色方面有明显优势.
展开▼
