Objective To compare the long-term efficacy of using light-cured glass ionomer,composite resin,and flowable resin as base materials for the restoration of wedge-shaped defects,providing a basis for clinical selection.Methods one hundred and thirteen patients who completed wedge-shaped defect filling repair were divided into glass ionomer group(34 cases,62 affected teeth),composite resin group(38 cases,73 affected teeth)and resin combination group(41 cases,86 affected teeth)according to the different filling repair methods.The repair effect,tooth sensitivity,microleakage status and repair satisfaction rate were compared among the three groups at 12 months of follow-up.Results The total success rate of filling in resin combination group(93.02%)at 12 months after repair was higher than that in glass ionomer group(80.65%)and composite resin group(82.19%),with statistically significant differences(χ2=5.167,4.403,both P<0.05).No statistical difference was shown in total incidence rate of tooth sensitivity among the three groups(4.84%vs.6.85%vs.3.49%)(χ2=0.947,P=0.623).The rate of microleakage≤grade I and total satisfaction rate of repair in composite resin group(68.49%,76.74%)and resin combination group(89.04%,96.51%)were higher than those in glass ionomer group(40.32%,72.58%)(P<0.05).Conclusions Compared with simple glass ionomer or composite resin repair,flowable resin combined with composite resin repair for wedge-shaped defects has higher repair success rate,milder microleakage degree and higher patient satisfaction.
国家科技期刊平台
NSTL
万方数据
