研究目的
Comparing the amount of tooth structure removed and composite remaining in Class III preparations when using an erbium laser or a rotary instrument.
研究成果
The Er,Cr:YSGG laser was more selective in removing existing composite restorations than a rotary instrument, removing less tooth structure and leaving behind less composite. However, some tooth structure loss and residual composite were inevitable with both methods.
研究不足
The study did not account for undercuts in the preparation, which could affect the amount of tooth structure removed. The operators' experience and personal judgment could also influence the precision of composite removal.
1:Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The study compared the removal of composite restorations using an erbium, chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet laser versus rotary instruments.
2:Sample Selection and Data Sources:
Fourteen extracted caries-free anterior teeth were used, with mesiolingual and distolingual Class III preparations.
3:List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Waterlase iPlus, Biolase), rotary instrument (handpiece and carbide burs), vinyl polysiloxane impressions, dental stone models, 3D optical scanner.
4:Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
Teeth were prepared, restored, aged by thermocycling, and then composite was removed using either the laser or rotary instrument. Impressions were taken post-removal for scanning.
5:Data Analysis Methods:
Scanned models were aligned and analyzed for dimensional changes (volume, mean depth, maximum depth, area) of removed tooth structure and residual composite, with statistical comparison (t test).
独家科研数据包,助您复现前沿成果,加速创新突破
获取完整内容