|
|
Effects of Different Types of Dental Restorations on Masticatory Ability and Gingival Crevicular Fluid Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Posterior Dental Defects |
YANG Haizhen, ZHANG Hongmei, ZHANG Fan, et al |
The Second Affiliated Hospital of PLA Air Force Military Medical University, Shaanxi Xi'an 710038, China |
|
|
Abstract Objective: To explore the effects of glass-based all-ceramic crown,zirconia all-ceramic crown and fiber post core zirconia crown restoration on masticatory ability and gingival crevicular fluid inflammatory injury indicators in patients with posterior dental defects. Methods: A total of 151 patients (151 teeth) with posterior dental defects who underwent selective post-core restoration after root canal therapy were included in this study.They were divided into three groups based on the material used for crown restoration:Group A received glass-based all-ceramic onlay restoration,Group B received zirconia all-ceramic crown restoration,and Group C received fiber post core zirconia crown restoration.Baseline data were analyzed using propensity score matching to obtain balanced and comparable baseline data in each group.The restoration outcomes were evaluated one year after the procedure,and masticatory function (occlusal force,masticatory efficiency),periodontal status (gingival bleeding index,periodontal pocket depth,attachment loss),and gingival crevicular fluid inflammatory markers (interleukin-1β,alkaline phosphatase,prostaglandin E2) were compared before and after restoration.Complications were also assessed. Results: Group A had significantly higher rates of restoration integrity,color matching,edge suitability,edge coloring,and gingival condition compared to Groups B and C (P<0.05).One year after restoration,all three groups showed significant improvements in occlusal force and masticatory efficiency compared to before restoration (P<0.05).Group A exhibited significantly greater improvements in occlusal force and masticatory efficiency compared to Groups B and C (P<0.05),and Group B had significantly greater improvements than Group C (P<0.05).Gingival crevicular fluid inflammatory markers (BI,PD,AL) increased significantly in all three groups after one year of restoration (P<0.05).Group A showed significantly smaller changes in BI,PD,and AL compared to Groups B and C (P<0.05),and Group B had significantly smaller changes than Group C (P<0.05).Similarly,inflammatory markers (IL-1β,ALP,PGE2) in gingival crevicular fluid increased significantly in all three groups after one year of restoration (P<0.05).Group A exhibited significantly greater changes in these markers compared to Groups B and C (P<0.05),and Group B had significantly greater changes than Group C (P<0.05).The total complication rate in Group A within one year after restoration was 1.96%,significantly lower than the 12.00% in Group B and 18.00% in Group C (P<0.05). Conclusion: Glass-based all-ceramic onlay restoration,when used for posterior dental defects after root canal therapy,leads to improved restoration outcomes,enhanced masticatory function,reduced inflammatory injury indicators in periodontal tissue and gingival crevicular fluid,and a lower incidence of complications compared to zirconia all-ceramic crown and fiber post core zirconia crown restoration.
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 林苇,刘昕.铸瓷高嵌体修复后牙大面积牙体缺损的远期效果及对咀嚼功能、牙龈状况的影响[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2022,38(8):467-470. [2] 段亚君,胡伟平.高嵌体修复下颌第一磨牙近中邻牙合面缺损的生物力学分析[J].哈尔滨医科大学学报,2022,56(1):59-63. [3] 张云涛.临床口腔科学[M].上海:科学技术文献出版社,2014.108-110. [4] 刘峰.美学修复牙体预备[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2013.126-129. [5] 陈文丽,谢小飞,刘芳,等.根管治疗后高嵌体与纤维桩核冠修复后牙牙体缺损的临床疗效观察[J].中华全科医学,2021,19(5):767-770. [6] 肖莎,高承志,周冬平.全瓷高嵌体修复前磨牙缺损的近、远期效果及对牙功能的影响[J].上海口腔医学,2022,31(3):300-304. [7] 谢雯静,张紫薇,张宇航,等.一步法同期设计制作玻璃纤维桩核和全瓷冠修复体的边缘微渗漏研究[J].口腔医学,2022,42(4):300-303. [8] 李燕侠,马毅慧,董青山.前磨牙大面积牙体缺损根管治疗术后不同修复方式的3年临床效果评价[J].华南国防医学杂志,2022,36(4):261-264. [9] 彭治凯,徐佳.牙周组织再生术联合无托槽隐形矫治对牙周炎患者龈沟液炎症因子的影响[J].中国微生态学杂志,2021,33(8):911-915. [10] 张倩,陈斌,闫福华.牙周基础治疗后龈沟液中4种生物标志物水平变化及临床意义[J].口腔疾病防治,2021,29(12):828-835. [11] 薛陆峰,薛秋波,陆伟.玻璃纤维桩联合全瓷冠修复前牙大面积缺损效果及对咀嚼能力的影响[J].中国医药导报,2022,19(3):103-106. |
|
|
|