American journal of translational research · 2024
Impact of dental operative microscopes on precision in minimally invasive dental restoration procedures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Peng, Zhang Lei, Chen Changxing, Yu Qing
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of dental operative microscopes on precision in minimally invasive dental restoration procedures.
METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients who underwent minimally invasive dental restoration procedure at Nanjing Stomatological Hospital from March 2018 to December 2019. Patients were categorized into two groups, an observation group treated with microscope-guided provisional restorations, and a control group treated using conventional methods. Clinical indices, including implant survival rates over five years, were compared between the groups. Multivariate analysis was employed to identify independent risk factors for implant failure.
RESULTS: After treatment the observation group exhibited significantly lower labial vertical marginal discrepancies and absolute marginal discrepancies, as well as improved labial gingival indices and periodontal probing depths compared to the control group (all P<0.001). Additionally, the observation group scored significantly higher in efficiency, accuracy, and overall quality of tooth preparation (all P<0.001). Clinicians using microscopes demonstrated significantly lower mean Rapid Upper Limb Assessment scores, indicating reduced ergonomic strain (P<0.001). Higher age, worn tooth defects, poor oral hygiene, and non-use of a microscope were identified as independent risk factors for implant failure at the five-year mark.
CONCLUSION: Dental operative microscopes significantly enhance the precision, efficiency, and ergonomic comfort in minimally invasive dental restorations for both clinicians and patients. Widespread adoption of this technology is strongly recommended.
METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients who underwent minimally invasive dental restoration procedure at Nanjing Stomatological Hospital from March 2018 to December 2019. Patients were categorized into two groups, an observation group treated with microscope-guided provisional restorations, and a control group treated using conventional methods. Clinical indices, including implant survival rates over five years, were compared between the groups. Multivariate analysis was employed to identify independent risk factors for implant failure.
RESULTS: After treatment the observation group exhibited significantly lower labial vertical marginal discrepancies and absolute marginal discrepancies, as well as improved labial gingival indices and periodontal probing depths compared to the control group (all P<0.001). Additionally, the observation group scored significantly higher in efficiency, accuracy, and overall quality of tooth preparation (all P<0.001). Clinicians using microscopes demonstrated significantly lower mean Rapid Upper Limb Assessment scores, indicating reduced ergonomic strain (P<0.001). Higher age, worn tooth defects, poor oral hygiene, and non-use of a microscope were identified as independent risk factors for implant failure at the five-year mark.
CONCLUSION: Dental operative microscopes significantly enhance the precision, efficiency, and ergonomic comfort in minimally invasive dental restorations for both clinicians and patients. Widespread adoption of this technology is strongly recommended.