首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Dental Research Dental Clinics Dental Prospects >Effect of two prophylaxis methods on marginal gap of Cl Vresin-modified glass-ionomer restorations
【2h】

Effect of two prophylaxis methods on marginal gap of Cl Vresin-modified glass-ionomer restorations

机译:两种预防方法对氯树脂改性的玻璃离聚物修复体边缘间隙的影响

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background. This study evaluated the effect of two prophylaxis techniques on the marginal gap of CI V resin-modified glass-ionomer restorations.>Methods. Standard Cl V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 48 sound bovine mandibular incisors in this in vitro study. After restoration of the cavities with GC Fuji II LC resin-modified glass-ionomer, the samples were randomly assigned to 3 groups of 16. In group 1, the prophylactic procedures were carried out with rubber cup and pumice powder and in group 2 with air-powder polishing device (APD). In group 3 (control), the samples did not undergo any prophylactic procedures. Then the marginal gaps were measured. Two-way ANOVA was used to compare marginal gaps at the occlusal and gingival margins between the groups. Post hoc Tukey test was used for two-by-two comparisons. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.>Results. There were significant differences in the means of marginal gaps in terms of prophylactic techniques (P < 0.001), with significantly larger marginal gaps in the APD group compared to the pumice and rubber cup group, which in turn exhibited significantly larger marginal gaps compared to the control group (P < 0.0005). In addition, the means of marginal gaps were significant in terms of the margin type (P < 0.001), with significantly larger gaps at gingival margins compared to the occlusal margins (P < 0.0005).>Conclusion. The prophylactic techniques used in this study had a negative effect on the marginal gaps of Cl V resin-modified glass-ionomer restorations.
机译:>背景。这项研究评估了两种预防技术对CI V树脂改性的玻璃离聚物修复体边缘间隙的影响。>方法。在这项体外研究中,有48头牛下颌切牙的颊面。用GC Fuji II LC树脂改性的玻璃离聚物修复型腔后,将样品随机分为3组,每组16个。在第1组中,使用橡胶杯和浮石粉进行预防,在第2组中,使用空气进行预防-粉末抛光装置(APD)。在第3组(对照组)中,样品未进行任何预防性操作。然后测量边缘间隙。使用双向方差分析比较两组之间在牙合和牙龈切缘处的切缘间隙。事后Tukey测试用于两两比较。统计学显着性设为P <0.05。>结果。就预防技术而言,边缘间隙的方式存在显着差异(P <0.001),与APD组相比,APD组的边缘间隙明显更大浮石和橡胶杯组,与对照组相比,边缘间隙明显更大(P <0.0005)。此外,就边缘类型而言,边缘间隙的平均值也很显着(P <0.001),与牙合边缘相比,牙龈边缘的间隙明显更大(P <0.0005)。>结论。这项研究中使用的预防技术对Cl V树脂改性的玻璃离聚物修复体的边缘间隙有负面影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号