{"title":"大块充填式后部修复体植入后的术后敏感性","authors":"M. Ayar","doi":"10.24896/JRMDS.2017539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this observational retrospective clinical study was to assess the post-operative sensitivity reported by patients following the placement of bulk-fill composite restorations. Patient records of the seventy-two subjects with previously untreated teeth requiring restorations due to caries lesions were used. Seventy-two restorations that were radiographically judged to be located in neither middle nor inner one-third of dentin were included in the study. Two resin composites had been used: Group 1- bulk-fill posterior resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative); Group 2- conventional resin composite (Filtek Z250). The same resin adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive) had been used with both composites. Patients had been contacted on days 2, 7, 14 and 30 postoperatively and asked about any presence sensitivity, the stimuli that created the sensitivity, if any, the duration of any sensitivity, and the intensity of any sensitivity using a rating from none too severe. The chi-square test showed cavity deepness (p=0.003) significantly affected post-operative sensitivity, while no significances between the different resin composites (p=0.465), cavity sizes (p=0.702) were revealed at day 2, respectively. By day 2, 8.3% of restorations placed in the middle one-third, and 37.5% of restorations placed in the inner one-third of dentin were slightly sensitive. By day 14, there had been no sensitive tooth. Both composite types have potential post-operative sensitivity with limited duration following their placements. The use of bulk-fill posterior restorative for restoration of the deep carious lesion does not seem to affect postoperative sensitivity of composite restorations.","PeriodicalId":17001,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science","volume":"5 1","pages":"53-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Postoperative sensitivity after placement of bulk-fill posterior restoration\",\"authors\":\"M. Ayar\",\"doi\":\"10.24896/JRMDS.2017539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this observational retrospective clinical study was to assess the post-operative sensitivity reported by patients following the placement of bulk-fill composite restorations. Patient records of the seventy-two subjects with previously untreated teeth requiring restorations due to caries lesions were used. Seventy-two restorations that were radiographically judged to be located in neither middle nor inner one-third of dentin were included in the study. Two resin composites had been used: Group 1- bulk-fill posterior resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative); Group 2- conventional resin composite (Filtek Z250). The same resin adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive) had been used with both composites. Patients had been contacted on days 2, 7, 14 and 30 postoperatively and asked about any presence sensitivity, the stimuli that created the sensitivity, if any, the duration of any sensitivity, and the intensity of any sensitivity using a rating from none too severe. The chi-square test showed cavity deepness (p=0.003) significantly affected post-operative sensitivity, while no significances between the different resin composites (p=0.465), cavity sizes (p=0.702) were revealed at day 2, respectively. By day 2, 8.3% of restorations placed in the middle one-third, and 37.5% of restorations placed in the inner one-third of dentin were slightly sensitive. By day 14, there had been no sensitive tooth. Both composite types have potential post-operative sensitivity with limited duration following their placements. The use of bulk-fill posterior restorative for restoration of the deep carious lesion does not seem to affect postoperative sensitivity of composite restorations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"53-58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24896/JRMDS.2017539\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24896/JRMDS.2017539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
这项观察性回顾性临床研究的目的是评估患者在放置大块填充复合修复体后报告的术后敏感性。使用了72名受试者的患者记录,这些受试者以前因龋齿病变而需要修复未经治疗的牙齿。研究中包括72个经射线照相判断既不位于牙本质中间也不位于内三分之一的修复体。使用了两种树脂复合材料:第1组-大块填充后部树脂复合材料(Filtek bulk fill posterior Restorative);第2组-常规树脂复合材料(Filtek Z250)。两种复合材料都使用了相同的树脂粘合剂系统(单键通用粘合剂)。术后第2天、第7天、第14天和第30天联系了患者,并询问了任何存在的敏感性、产生敏感性的刺激(如果有的话)、任何敏感性的持续时间以及任何敏感性的强度,评分为“不太严重”。卡方检验显示,空腔深度(p=0.003)显著影响术后敏感性,而不同树脂复合材料(p=0.465)和空腔大小(p=0.702)在第2天分别没有显著差异。到第2天,8.3%的位于牙本质中间三分之一的修复体和37.5%的位于内三分之一牙本质的修复体轻微敏感。到第14天,已经没有敏感的牙齿了。两种复合型都具有潜在的术后敏感性,植入后持续时间有限。使用大块充填后修复体修复隆突深部病变似乎不会影响复合修复体的术后敏感性。
Postoperative sensitivity after placement of bulk-fill posterior restoration
The purpose of this observational retrospective clinical study was to assess the post-operative sensitivity reported by patients following the placement of bulk-fill composite restorations. Patient records of the seventy-two subjects with previously untreated teeth requiring restorations due to caries lesions were used. Seventy-two restorations that were radiographically judged to be located in neither middle nor inner one-third of dentin were included in the study. Two resin composites had been used: Group 1- bulk-fill posterior resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative); Group 2- conventional resin composite (Filtek Z250). The same resin adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive) had been used with both composites. Patients had been contacted on days 2, 7, 14 and 30 postoperatively and asked about any presence sensitivity, the stimuli that created the sensitivity, if any, the duration of any sensitivity, and the intensity of any sensitivity using a rating from none too severe. The chi-square test showed cavity deepness (p=0.003) significantly affected post-operative sensitivity, while no significances between the different resin composites (p=0.465), cavity sizes (p=0.702) were revealed at day 2, respectively. By day 2, 8.3% of restorations placed in the middle one-third, and 37.5% of restorations placed in the inner one-third of dentin were slightly sensitive. By day 14, there had been no sensitive tooth. Both composite types have potential post-operative sensitivity with limited duration following their placements. The use of bulk-fill posterior restorative for restoration of the deep carious lesion does not seem to affect postoperative sensitivity of composite restorations.