论文部分内容阅读
本文采用离体实验比较CAD/CAM计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制造制作的瓷嵌体同实验室人工制作的瓷嵌体边缘适合性的差异。 选择24颗形态、大小相似的人下颌第一磨牙为研究对象,随机分为4组,每组6只牙。①实验室人工制作的Dicor玻璃陶瓷嵌体;②CAD/CAM制作的Dicor-MGC玻璃陶瓷嵌体;③实验室人工制作Biodent瓷嵌体;④CAD/CAM制作的CEREC Vita MK Ⅰ瓷嵌体。每组中磨牙标本均按标准备出MOD箱状洞型(无短斜面,(牙合)面近远中长度10mm,宽度5mm,(牙合)面、近中邻面、远中邻面的深度分别是3.2mm,5.4mm,6.5mm)。1,3组(牙合)面箱状轴壁聚合度4°,2,4组邻面箱状
In this study, we compared the marginal suitability between porcelain inlays and artificial inlays made by CAD / CAM CAD / CAM in vitro. Twenty-four human mandibular first molars with the same shape and size were selected as the research object and randomly divided into 4 groups with 6 teeth in each group. ① laboratory artificial Dicor glass ceramic inlay; ② Dicor-MGC glass ceramic inlays made by CAD / CAM; ③ Biodent ceramic inlays in laboratory; ④ CEREC Vita MK Ⅰ ceramic inlays made by CAD / CAM. Each group of molars specimens prepared according to the standard MOD box-shaped hole (no short bevel, (occlusal) face near and far in the length of 10mm, width 5mm, (occlusal) face, near the adjacent surface, far adjacent to the surface Depth of 3.2mm, 5.4mm, 6.5mm respectively). 1,3 group (occlusal) face box-shaped axis polymerization degree 4 °, 2,4 group adjacent box-shaped