论文部分内容阅读
目的在口腔修复中,比较钛金属烤瓷冠与非贵金属烤瓷冠对患者牙周组织的影响.方法就诊于口腔科的108例需烤瓷冠修复的患者,按照使用的烤瓷冠材料不同,分为钛金属烤瓷冠组和非贵金属烤瓷冠组,各54例,修复完成24个月后,对患者进行随访,比较两组患者烤瓷冠变化情况以及患者牙周组织情况.结果非贵金属烤瓷冠组34例出现返青(62.96%),而钛金属烤瓷冠者全部色泽均匀美观,差异明显,结果具有统计学意义(P﹤0.05),颈缘密合性以及厚度方面差异不明显,P >0.05;非贵金属烤瓷冠组有14例.龈缘充血、11例龈乳头水肿、12例牙龈染色,牙龈发病率68.5%(37/54)高于钛金属烤瓷冠组7.4%(4/54),差异明显,结果具有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)结论钛金属烤瓷冠对患者牙龈刺激性小,耐腐蚀,使用期限更持久,且不会造成不良影响,值得为患者推荐.“,”Objective: to compare the effect in patients with titanium-metal porcelain crown and no-precious-metal porcelain crown. Methods: 120 PFM patients were randomly divided into two groups: 54 cases of titanium-metal porcelain crown group and 54 cases of no-precious-metal porcelain crown group according to the difference of porcelain crown. After 24 months, the patients were folowed to compare PFM crown and changes in patients with periodontal tissue. Results: 34 cases in no-precious-metal porcelain crown group turned up trun green(62.96%), and al patients in titanium-metal porcelain crown group had wonderful appearance and perfect homogeneity. There was obvious difference between two groups(P﹤0.05), but there was not obvious difference in restoration margins and thickness(P>0.05); there were 14 cases of gingival margin injection, 11 cases of gingival papila edema, 12 cases of gingival staining in no-precious-metal porcelain crown group. The Incidence of gum disease 68.5%(37/54) was higher than titanium-metal porcelain crown group 7.4%(4/54). There was obvious difference between two groups(P﹤0.05). Conclusions: Titanium metal porcelain crown has little irritation on gingival of patients, has corrosion resistance, more durable of using term and has no adverse effects on patients. It is worthy to use.