两种根管糊剂根管充填的临床疗效观察  

Evaluation of clinical observation after root canal filling with two different materials

作　　者：缪键[1] 王聪[1] 

机构地区：[1]成都市第三人民医院,四川成都610031

出　　处：《四川医学》2009年第4期489-490,共2页Sichuan Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的评价两种根管充填糊剂充填根管后的近期和远期效果。方法160个需进行根管治疗术的患牙随机分为2组,Vitapex糊剂+牙胶尖组与AHPlus糊剂+牙胶尖组,比较术后疼痛反应和1年后的成功率,进行疗效评价。结果根充后1d,AHPlus组疼痛发生率高于Vitapex组(P<0.05),差异有统计学意义,7d时疼痛反应则无明显差异。治疗后1年的成功率Vitapex组低于AHPlus组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论Vitapex糊剂根充后近期术后反应小,AHPlus糊剂远期疗效好,更适用于恒牙根管充填。Objective To evaluate clinical effects of short-term cure or long term cure after root canal filling with two different kinds of materiais. Methods A total of 160 teeth for root canal treatment were divided into two groups, AHPlus ＋ gutta-percha and Vitapex ＋ gutta-percha.The occurrence of pain in 1 day and 7 days after treatment were record and the therapeutic effects were evaluated by follow up of 1 year. Resalts The occurrence rate of pain after root canal therapy in 1 day using AHPlus was higher than of the group using Vitapex with significant difference （ P 〈 0.05 ） ; after 7 days the rate of pain of AHPLus was higher than that of Vitapex without significant difference（ P〉 0.05）. After 1 year the efficient rate of AHPlus was higher than that of Vitapex with significant difference （ P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Root canal treatment applying Vitapex ＋ gutta-percha can decrease the rate of pain occurrence after mot canal filling in short period. The AHPlus is a better filling material in long period.

关 键 词：根管充填 VITAPEX糊剂 AHPlus糊剂 疗效 

分 类 号：R781.05[医药卫生—口腔医学]