Estudio comparativo del desempeño clínico de restauraciones proximales de resina directa e incrustaciones de resina
Cargando...
Archivos
Fecha
2012
Autores
Profesor/a Guía
Facultad/escuela
Idioma
es
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad Andrés Bello
Nombre de Curso
Licencia CC
Licencia CC
Resumen
Título: Estudio comparativo del desempeño clínico de restauraciones proximales de
resina directa e incrustaciones de resina.
Introducción: Muchas veces cuando se está justo en el límite de la indicación para una
restauración de resina directa o indirecta, se elige la primera principalmente porque
implica un tiempo clínico y un costo mucho menor para el paciente, y no porque tenga
un mejor desempeño clínico que una incrustación de resina.
Objetivo: Determinar si existen diferencias significativas en relación al desempeño
clínico de restauraciones próximo oclusales, realizadas con incrustaciones de resina y
con restauraciones de resina directa.
Tipo de estudio: Estudio clínico comparativo, observacional transversal, retrospectivo.
Muestra: Se seleccionaron piezas del sector posterior con restauraciones de resina
próximo oclusales. Se evaluaron 30 piezas dentales restauradas con incrustaciones de
resina y 30 con resina compuesta directa. Se analizó en cada muestra la integridad
marginal, recidiva de caries, punto de contacto y anatomía.
Método de recolección de datos: Visión directa para evaluar integridad y anatomía;
Sondaje con sonda de caries para evaluar integridad; Radiografías Bitewing para
evaluar recidiva de caries; y Seda dental para el punto de contacto.
Análisis estadístico utilizado: Prueba de proporciones para dos muestras
independientes.
Resultado: Se observó que la prueba de proporciones no fue significativa (p>0,05) en
ninguna de las comparaciones.
Discusión: Al observar los resultados obtenidos se puede apreciar que en todas las
variables medidas el resultado fue mejor para las incrustaciones de resina por sobre las
realizadas por técnica directa. Esto concordaría con los trabajos realizados por Yeli y
col (11) y Nandini (19). Sin embargo, debido a que estadísticamente no existieron
diferencias significativas (p>0,05) entre una técnica y otra, en ninguna de las variables
comparadas, se considera que ambas técnicas de restauración presentan un
desempeño clínico similar.
Conclusión: Se concluye que no existen diferencias estadísticamente significativas en
relación al desempeño clínico de ambos tipos de restauración. Sin embargo, se observó
una tendencia que muestra que la técnica indirecta con incrustación de resina poseería
un mejor rendimiento en lo que refiere a integridad marginal, recidiva de caries, punto
de contacto y anatomía.
Title: Comparative study of clinical performance of proximal composite restorations, made by direct method and inlay resin. lntroduction: Many times when we are just at the limit to choose a direct or indirect composite restoration, the first one is chosen mainly because it involves a lower clinical time and cost to the patient, and not because it has a better clinical performance than a resin inlay. Objective: To determine if there are significant differences in the clinical performance of proximo occlusal restorations, made with resin inlays and direct composite restorations. Type of study: Comparative clinical study, transversal observational, retrospective. Sample: Teeth of the posterior sector with proximo occlusal resin restorations were selected. 30 teeth restored with resin inlays and 30 with direct composite resin were evaluated. Each sample was analyzed in marginal integrity, recurrent caries, contact point and anatomy. Data Collection Method: Direct view to evaluate integrity and anatomy; Dental explorer instrument to evaluate integrity; Bitewings radiographs to evaluate recurrent caries, and dental floss to contact point. Statistical analysis used: Test of proportions for two independent samples. Results: lt was observed that the test of proportions was not significant (p> 0.05) in any of the comparisons. Discussion: By observing the results obtained it can be seen that in all the variables measured the result was better for resin inlays than the direct technic. This could be consistent with the works of Yeli et al (11) and Nandini (19). However, because there were no statistically significant differences (p>0,05) between one and another technique, in any of the variables compared, it is considered that both restoration techniques have similar clinical performance. Conclusion: lt is concluded that there are no statistically significant differences in relation to the clinical performance of both types of restoration. However, there was a trend showing that the indirect resin inlay may possess better performance related to marginal integrity, recurrent caries, contact point and anatomy.
Title: Comparative study of clinical performance of proximal composite restorations, made by direct method and inlay resin. lntroduction: Many times when we are just at the limit to choose a direct or indirect composite restoration, the first one is chosen mainly because it involves a lower clinical time and cost to the patient, and not because it has a better clinical performance than a resin inlay. Objective: To determine if there are significant differences in the clinical performance of proximo occlusal restorations, made with resin inlays and direct composite restorations. Type of study: Comparative clinical study, transversal observational, retrospective. Sample: Teeth of the posterior sector with proximo occlusal resin restorations were selected. 30 teeth restored with resin inlays and 30 with direct composite resin were evaluated. Each sample was analyzed in marginal integrity, recurrent caries, contact point and anatomy. Data Collection Method: Direct view to evaluate integrity and anatomy; Dental explorer instrument to evaluate integrity; Bitewings radiographs to evaluate recurrent caries, and dental floss to contact point. Statistical analysis used: Test of proportions for two independent samples. Results: lt was observed that the test of proportions was not significant (p> 0.05) in any of the comparisons. Discussion: By observing the results obtained it can be seen that in all the variables measured the result was better for resin inlays than the direct technic. This could be consistent with the works of Yeli et al (11) and Nandini (19). However, because there were no statistically significant differences (p>0,05) between one and another technique, in any of the variables compared, it is considered that both restoration techniques have similar clinical performance. Conclusion: lt is concluded that there are no statistically significant differences in relation to the clinical performance of both types of restoration. However, there was a trend showing that the indirect resin inlay may possess better performance related to marginal integrity, recurrent caries, contact point and anatomy.
Notas
Tesis (Cirujano Dentista, Especialización en Internado Clínico)
Palabras clave
Materiales Dentales, Restauraciones próximo oclusales, Resina Compuesta, Incrustación de resina