方 寧,瞿利軍,馬江敏
(昆山市中醫(yī)醫(yī)院口腔科 江蘇 昆山 215300)
輔助固位形增強(qiáng)短磨牙全冠修復(fù)體固位的臨床研究
方 寧,瞿利軍,馬江敏
(昆山市中醫(yī)醫(yī)院口腔科 江蘇 昆山 215300)
目的:觀察兩種固位形對(duì)短冠磨牙全冠固位效果的影響。方法:選取82顆臨床牙冠為4mm的第一磨牙,隨機(jī)分為常規(guī)修復(fù)組、嵌體固位形組和溝固位形組,隨訪統(tǒng)計(jì)脫落例數(shù)。結(jié)果:隨訪觀察3年,溝固位形組與嵌體固位形組脫落率低于常規(guī)修復(fù)組(P<0.05),溝固位形組與嵌體固位形組的脫落率比較無(wú)顯著性差異(P>0.05)。結(jié)論:嵌體固位形和溝固位形均可明顯提高磨牙全冠的固位力。
輔助固位形;固位力;磨牙;嵌體固位形;溝固位形
由于牙冠過(guò)短導(dǎo)致全冠修復(fù)體脫落在臨床很常見。為了保證這類患牙全冠修復(fù)體有效固位,常用的方法包括增加頸部肩臺(tái),減小軸壁會(huì)聚角,增加輔助固位形等[1]。然而不同形式的固位效果尚存爭(zhēng)議[2-3],本研究擬通過(guò)觀察嵌體固位形和溝固位形對(duì)短磨牙冠的修復(fù)效果,探討不同輔助固位方式對(duì)加強(qiáng)短磨牙修復(fù)體固位的相關(guān)問(wèn)題,為臨床提供理論指導(dǎo)。
1.1臨床資料:選取患者63例,其中男29例,女34例,共82顆患牙,年齡20~45歲。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①患牙均為第一磨牙且已完善根管治療,X線片示根尖周無(wú)明顯低密度影;②牙體預(yù)備后牙合齦高度為3mm,且對(duì)頜牙為天然牙,上下牙列咬合關(guān)系良好;③無(wú)牙列缺損,牙周狀況良好;④排除隱裂牙、牙體頰舌壁過(guò)薄及偏側(cè)咀嚼者;④患者能定期隨訪。所有病例均采用鈷鉻合金烤瓷冠(金屬牙合面)修復(fù),隨機(jī)分為三組,其中嵌體固位形組28例,溝固位形組28例,常規(guī)修復(fù)組26例。
1.2修復(fù)方法
1.2.1牙體預(yù)備:①常規(guī)修復(fù)組(對(duì)照組):基牙行完善根管治療后,樹脂充填,金剛砂車針在牙合面均勻磨除1mm,各軸壁預(yù)備1mm,在齦緣下制備90°肩臺(tái),各軸壁光滑無(wú)倒凹;②溝固位形組:牙體常規(guī)預(yù)備與對(duì)照組相同,在預(yù)備體的頰舌軸壁,用柱狀金剛砂車針(TF-12,MANI日本)在牙體的頰舌軸壁預(yù)備出深度為1mm的固位溝,溝的形態(tài)為半圓形,兩條溝相互平行并于就位道一致;③嵌體固位形組:牙體常規(guī)預(yù)備與對(duì)照組相同,根據(jù)牙體髓室固有形態(tài),在預(yù)備體牙合面制備出深3mm的箱形固位體,髓底用光固化樹脂(CHARISMA,德國(guó))封閉,壁與固位道平行并外展2o~6o,無(wú)洞斜面。
1.2.2修復(fù)體制作粘固:硅橡膠(3M,美國(guó))二次印模法取模,超硬石膏灌模。送加工廠制作鈷鉻合金烤瓷冠(金屬牙合面)(Co-Cr合金,BEGO德國(guó)),修復(fù)體制作由同一組技師完成。修復(fù)體口內(nèi)常規(guī)試戴,檢查外形、邊緣、鄰接關(guān)系,咬合,排除牙合干擾及早接觸點(diǎn),嚴(yán)格隔濕,聚羧酸鋅粘結(jié)劑(HY-Bond,SHOFU日本)粘固。
1.3統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)處理:使用SPSS 19.0統(tǒng)計(jì)分析,組間采用χ2檢驗(yàn)或Fisher精確概率法對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)分析,以P<0.05為差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
臨床隨訪3年,共14顆修復(fù)體發(fā)生脫落,未脫落的修復(fù)體牙齦無(wú)紅腫,咬合關(guān)系良好,患者無(wú)自覺癥狀。常規(guī)修復(fù)組、溝固位形組和嵌體固位形組脫落率分別為34.1%、7.0%和10.7%,其中溝固位形組和常規(guī)修復(fù)組比較(P<0.05),嵌體固位形組與常規(guī)修復(fù)組(P<0.05)比較差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義;溝固位形組和嵌體固位形組比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。具體見表1。
表1 三組患者3年固位效果統(tǒng)計(jì) (例,%)
在口腔咀嚼運(yùn)動(dòng)中,修復(fù)體受到來(lái)自各個(gè)方向的力,當(dāng)受到側(cè)向力時(shí)會(huì)在一側(cè)冠邊緣形成以其為支點(diǎn)的旋轉(zhuǎn),短磨牙冠因?qū)?cè)缺乏牙體組織約束區(qū)而容易脫落[4]。Weed[5]認(rèn)為臨床牙冠小于4mm的磨牙,不足以滿足臨床的固位要求[6]。對(duì)于臨床小于4mm的磨牙病例,有學(xué)者采用正畸牽引術(shù)和牙冠延長(zhǎng)術(shù)來(lái)增加牙冠高度,這不失為一種解決方式,但是容易改變牙齒的冠根比,降低牙周儲(chǔ)備力,影響遠(yuǎn)期修復(fù)效果[7-8]。本研究采用了兩種輔助固位形來(lái)增強(qiáng)短冠磨牙的固位力,經(jīng)過(guò)3年的臨床觀察取得了明顯效果。
實(shí)驗(yàn)證明,臨床牙冠小于4mm的病例,采用輔助固位形與常規(guī)修復(fù)方式相比能顯著降低修復(fù)體的脫落率。原因可能是因?yàn)楣涛恍魏突垒S壁間能夠形成較強(qiáng)的機(jī)械嵌合力,增大了粘結(jié)面積的同時(shí)減小了全冠修復(fù)體的旋轉(zhuǎn)半徑。有學(xué)者研究認(rèn)為溝固位形增大了粘結(jié)面積,使基牙預(yù)備體的軸壁聚合度接近平行,降低了整體聚合度,改變了脫位道與軸壁之間的角度,限制了全冠脫位[9];而嵌體固位形其實(shí)是一種聯(lián)合固位體,它將位于冠內(nèi)的髓室固位體和位于冠外的全冠固位體相結(jié)合,從而獲得雙重固位,增強(qiáng)了抗旋轉(zhuǎn)脫位力,當(dāng)其受到垂直及側(cè)向牙合的壓力后可以分散于剩余牙體組織,加強(qiáng)了固位力和抗脫落能力[10]。
在本研究中,兩種輔助固位形之間沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,但嵌體固位形脫落率要略高于溝固位形,原因可能在于脫落的3例嵌體固位形因大面積齲壞造成充填材料抗力形不足而導(dǎo)致的整個(gè)預(yù)備體崩裂。提示應(yīng)根據(jù)剩余牙體組織量和患者的髓腔大小來(lái)選擇合適的輔助固位形式,不應(yīng)片面追求固位形式而忽視剩余牙體組織的抗力形,必要時(shí)應(yīng)增加樁核修復(fù)。溝固位形脫落的2例患者天然牙磨耗嚴(yán)重,可能與長(zhǎng)期受到較大的咬合力過(guò)大有關(guān),在這種情況下可使用超強(qiáng)粘結(jié)劑和控制聚合度等方法加強(qiáng)固位。
全冠固位除與預(yù)備體高度相關(guān)外,還與冠密合度、粘結(jié)劑的類型、軸壁聚合度、咬合情況等有關(guān)[11-12]。臨床上,在短牙冠進(jìn)行全冠修復(fù)時(shí),應(yīng)嚴(yán)格把握適應(yīng)證,合理設(shè)計(jì),盡量保留牙冠高度。對(duì)于短磨牙冠者,除應(yīng)用輔助固位形外還應(yīng)注意減小聚合角,增加修復(fù)體的密合度。在本次實(shí)驗(yàn)中,沒(méi)有采用粘結(jié)力較強(qiáng)的樹脂粘結(jié)劑,而是使用了聚羧酸鋅粘結(jié)劑,對(duì)長(zhǎng)期的實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果可能會(huì)造成一定影響。從研究結(jié)果來(lái)看,嵌體固位形與溝固位形優(yōu)于常規(guī)修復(fù),但在制備牙體過(guò)程中可能會(huì)降低其抗力形,長(zhǎng)期效果有待進(jìn)一步觀察。
[1]徐君伍.口腔修復(fù)學(xué)[M].4版.北京:人民衛(wèi)生出版社,2001:36.
[2]Roudsari RV,Satterthwaite JD.The influence of auxiliary features on the resistance form of short molars prepared for complete cast crowns[J]. Prosthet Dent,2011,106(5):305-309.
[3]Proussaefs P,Campagni W.The effectiveness of auxiliary features on a tooth preparation with inadequate resistance form[J].Prosthet Dent,2004,91(1):33-41.
[4]楊麗媛,劉翠玲.輔助固位形對(duì)低矮磨牙全冠修復(fù)體固位力和邊緣適合性的影響[J].華西口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2015,33(5):474-477.
[5]Weed RM,Baez RJ. A metor demerminning adequate resistance form of comlete cast crown preparation [J].Prosthet Dent,1984,52(3):330-334.
[6]Meng QF,CHen LJ,Meng J,et al.Fracture resistance after simulated crown lengthening and forced tooth eruption of endodonticallytreated teeth restored with a fiber post-and-core system[J].Am J Dent,2009,22(3):147-150.
[7]Esteves HJ,Costa N.Clinical determination of angle convergence in a tooth preparation for a complete crown[J].Int Prosthodont,2014,27(5):472-474.
[8]Farshad B,Ehsan G,Mahmoud S,et al. Evaluation of resistance form of different preparation features on mandibular molars[J].Indian J Dent Res,2013,24(2):216-219.
[9]Roudsari RV,Satterthwaite JD.The influence of auxiliary features on the resistance form of short molars prepared for complete cast crowns[J]. Prosthet Dent,2011,106(5):305-309.
[10]Roudsari RV,Satterthwaite JD. The influence of auxiliary features on the resistance form of short molars prepared for complete cast crowns[J].J Prosthet Dent,2011,106(5):305-309.
[11]Naik VA, Jurel SK. Comparative analysis of auxiliary retentive factors affecting retention of complete cast metal crownn[J].Int J Stomatol Occlusion Med,2010,3(4):195-199.
[12]Trier AC,Parker MH,Cameron SM,et al.Evaluation of resistance form of dislodged crowns and retainers[J].J Prosthet Dent, 1998, 80(4):405-409.
編輯/李陽(yáng)利
Clinical study on auxiliary retention form enhancing the retention of short coronal molar full crown prosthesis
FANG Ning,QU Li-jun,MA Jiang-min
(Department of Dentistry,The Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan,Kunshan 215300,Jiangsu,China)
Objective To observe the effect of two kinds of different auxiliary resistance forms on molars with short crowns. Methods 82 first molars with clinical crown of 4mm were randomly divided into three groups:routine repair group, inlay retention group and groove retention group.The statistical analysis was used to analyze the number of failure. Results Followed up for 3 years,found that the rates of failure between the group of groove retention and inlay retention were lower than the routine repair group(P<0.05),and there were no significant difference between the teeth with groove retention and retention inlay groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Resistance of a short coronal tooth can be obviously improved both by mean of inlay and groove retention form.
auxiliary retention form; retention; molar; inlay retention form; groove retention form
R783.3
A
1008-6455(2016)11-0096-02
2016-08-07
2016-09-30