PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Self-glazed zirconia (SZ) restorations are made by a novel additive three-dimensional gel deposition approach, which are suitable for a straightforward completely digital workflow. SZ has recently been used as minimally invasive veneer, but its clinical outcomes have not been clarified yet. This study aimed to evaluate the preliminary clinical outcomes of SZ veneers compared with the widely used lithium disilicate glass-ceramic veneers made by either pressing (PG) or milling (MG) process.
METHODS: Fifty-six patients treated with SZ, PG, and MG veneers by 2 specialists between June 2018 and October 2022 were identified. Patients were recalled for follow-up at least 1 year after restoration. Clinical outcomes were assessed by 2 independent evaluators according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Overall patient satisfaction was assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS), and analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Chi-square test was applied to compare the difference in the success and survival rates among the 3 groups.
RESULTS: A total of 51 patients restored with 45 SZ, 40 PG, and 41 MG veneers completed the study, with a patient dropout rate of 8.9%. Mean and standard deviation of follow-up period was 35.0 ± 14.7 months. All restorations performed well at baseline, except for 2 SZ veneers with mismatched color (rated Bravo). During follow-up, marginal discrepancy (rated Bravo) was found in 4 MG veneers and 1 PG veneer, and partially fractured (rated Charlie) was found in another 2 PG veneers. The survival rate of SZ, PG, and MG veneers was 100%, 95%, and 100%, with a success rate of 95.56%, 92.50%, and 90.24%, respectively, none of which were significantly different (p = 0.099 and 0.628, respectively). The mean VAS score of SZ, PG, and MG was 95.00 ± 1.57, 93.93 ± 2.40, and 94.89 ± 2.00 respectively, without significant difference (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: SZ veneers exhibited comparable preliminary clinical outcomes to PG and MG veneers, which could be considered as a feasible option for minimally invasive restorative treatment.
METHODS: Fifty-six patients treated with SZ, PG, and MG veneers by 2 specialists between June 2018 and October 2022 were identified. Patients were recalled for follow-up at least 1 year after restoration. Clinical outcomes were assessed by 2 independent evaluators according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Overall patient satisfaction was assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS), and analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Chi-square test was applied to compare the difference in the success and survival rates among the 3 groups.
RESULTS: A total of 51 patients restored with 45 SZ, 40 PG, and 41 MG veneers completed the study, with a patient dropout rate of 8.9%. Mean and standard deviation of follow-up period was 35.0 ± 14.7 months. All restorations performed well at baseline, except for 2 SZ veneers with mismatched color (rated Bravo). During follow-up, marginal discrepancy (rated Bravo) was found in 4 MG veneers and 1 PG veneer, and partially fractured (rated Charlie) was found in another 2 PG veneers. The survival rate of SZ, PG, and MG veneers was 100%, 95%, and 100%, with a success rate of 95.56%, 92.50%, and 90.24%, respectively, none of which were significantly different (p = 0.099 and 0.628, respectively). The mean VAS score of SZ, PG, and MG was 95.00 ± 1.57, 93.93 ± 2.40, and 94.89 ± 2.00 respectively, without significant difference (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: SZ veneers exhibited comparable preliminary clinical outcomes to PG and MG veneers, which could be considered as a feasible option for minimally invasive restorative treatment.
摘要：
背景：自上光氧化锆（SZ）修复体是通过一种新型的添加剂三维凝胶沉积方法制成的，这适用于一个简单的完全数字化的工作流程。SZ最近被用作微创贴面，但其临床结局尚未明确.本研究旨在评估SZ贴面与通过压制（PG）或铣削（MG）工艺制成的广泛使用的二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷贴面的初步临床结果。
方法：56例患者接受SZ治疗，PG,在2018年6月至2022年10月期间，由2名专家确定了MG贴面。患者在恢复后至少1年被召回随访。根据修改后的美国公共卫生服务（USPHS）标准，由2名独立评估人员评估临床结果。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估患者总体满意度，并通过单因素方差分析。采用卡方检验比较3组间成功率和生存率的差异。
结果：共有51例患者以45SZ恢复，40PG,41个MG贴面完成了这项研究，患者辍学率为8.9%。随访时间的平均值和标准差为35.0±14.7个月。所有修复体在基线时表现良好，除了2个颜色不匹配的SZ贴面（额定布拉沃）。随访期间,在4个MG贴面和1个PG贴面中发现了边际差异(评级为Bravo)，在另外2PG贴面中发现了部分骨折（评级为Charlie）。SZ的存活率，PG,MG贴面是100%，95%,100%,成功率为95.56%，92.50%,和90.24%，分别,没有显着差异（分别为p=0.099和0.628）。SZ的平均VAS评分，PG,MG分别为95.00±1.57、93.93±2.40和94.89±2.00，无显著性差异(p>0.05)。
结论：SZ贴面表现出与PG和MG贴面相当的初步临床结果，这可以被认为是微创修复治疗的可行选择。
方法：56例患者接受SZ治疗，PG,在2018年6月至2022年10月期间，由2名专家确定了MG贴面。患者在恢复后至少1年被召回随访。根据修改后的美国公共卫生服务（USPHS）标准，由2名独立评估人员评估临床结果。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估患者总体满意度，并通过单因素方差分析。采用卡方检验比较3组间成功率和生存率的差异。
结果：共有51例患者以45SZ恢复，40PG,41个MG贴面完成了这项研究，患者辍学率为8.9%。随访时间的平均值和标准差为35.0±14.7个月。所有修复体在基线时表现良好，除了2个颜色不匹配的SZ贴面（额定布拉沃）。随访期间,在4个MG贴面和1个PG贴面中发现了边际差异(评级为Bravo)，在另外2PG贴面中发现了部分骨折（评级为Charlie）。SZ的存活率，PG,MG贴面是100%，95%,100%,成功率为95.56%，92.50%,和90.24%，分别,没有显着差异（分别为p=0.099和0.628）。SZ的平均VAS评分，PG,MG分别为95.00±1.57、93.93±2.40和94.89±2.00，无显著性差异(p>0.05)。
结论：SZ贴面表现出与PG和MG贴面相当的初步临床结果，这可以被认为是微创修复治疗的可行选择。
