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.
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。