摘要目的 探索瓷睿刻蓝光照相(CEREC Bluecam)数字化印模技术在口腔固定桥修复牙体预备中的应用价值.方法 将行3单位固定桥修复的80例患者牙体粗备后按随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,观察组40例用瓷睿刻蓝光照相数字化印模进行检查,对照组40例用常规方法检查.用CEREC4.2软件和石膏模型对肩台宽度均匀、肩台平滑连续、肩台边缘平整、轴壁无倒凹、轴面聚合度良好、咬合空间适合、共同就位道良好等进行评价.结果 肩台宽度均匀、肩台平滑连续、肩台边缘平整、轴壁无倒凹、轴面聚合度良好、咬合空间适合、共同就位道良好,观察组和对照组数字化印模评价良好的分别为95.0％(38例)对62.5％(25例),92.5％(37例)对77.5％(31例),97.5％(39例)对75.0％(30例),95.0％(38例)对72.5％(29例),90.0％(36例)对65.0％(26例),100.0％(40例)对52.5％(21例),97.5％(39例)对75.0％(30例),差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);而石膏模型评价良好的分别为87.5％(35例)对60.0％(24例),97.5％(39例)对70.0％(30例),90.0％(36例)对62.5％(25例),95.0％(38例)对75.0％(30例),92.5％(37例)对70.0％(28例),100.0％(40例)对72.5％(29例),100.0％(40例)对65.0％(26例),差异均有统计学意义(均P＜0.05).结论 CEREC Bluecam数字化印模辅助下的牙体预备质量均优于传统方法.

abstractsObjective To study CEREC Bluecam digital impressions in tooth preparation of fixed bridge.Methods Totally 80 patients of tooth preparation of 3 units fixed bridge were divided into experiment group (with CEREC Bluecam digital impressions system) and control group (with traditional method) randomly,and then captured the CEREC Bluecam digital impressions and made the dental models after the tooth preparation.Shoulders width,smooth and continuation of shoulders,paleness of shoulders edge,axial chamfers,axial converge degree,occlusal space and common path of insertion were analyzed.Results In the digital impressions in the equality of shoulders width,smooth and continuation of shoulders,paleness of shoulders edge,axial chamfers,axial converge degree,occlusal space and common path of insertion,the experiment group was better than control group:95.0％ (38 cases) vs.62.5％ (25 cases),92.5％ (37 cases) vs.77.5％ (31 cases),97.5％ (39 cases) vs.75.0％ (30 cases),95.0％ (38 cases) vs.72.5％ (29 cases),90.0％ (36 cases) vs.65.0％ (26 cases),100.0％ (40 cases) vs.52.5％ (21 cases),and 97.5％ (39 cases)vs.75.0％ (30 cases),respectively,all (P＜0.05).In the dental models,the experiment group was better than control group:87.5％ (35 cases) vs.60.0％ (24 cases),97.5％ (39 cases) vs.75.0％ (30 cases),90.0％ (36 cases) vs 62.5％ (25 cases),95.0％ (38 cases) vs 75.0％(30 cases),92.5％ (37 cases) vs 70.0％ (28 cases),100.0％ (40 cases) vs.72.5％ (29 cases),and 100.0％ (40 cases) vs.65.0％ (26 cases),respectively,(all P＜0.05).Conclusions The tooth preparation quality with the CEREC Bluecam digital impressions is better than that of the traditional method.