超声波及喷砂洁牙后牙本质过敏治疗的疗效  

Treatment of Dentine Hypersensitivity Caused by Ultrasonic Cleaning and Sandblasting Scaling

作　　者：任艳云[1] 游云华[2] 李斌[1] 张吉敏[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民解放军第117医院口腔科,杭州310013 [2]中山大学附属第五医院口腔科,广东珠海519000

出　　处：《南昌大学学报（医学版）》2012年第12期73-75,共3页Journal of Nanchang University：Medical Sciences

摘　　要：目的研究Gluma、极固宁与可乐丽菲露SE-Bond治疗牙本质过敏的疗效。方法将2009年10月至2011年4月收治的超声波加喷砂龈上洁治术后出现牙本质过敏的180例患者,按随机数字表法分成4组,每组45例。A组用Gluma脱敏治疗,B组用极固宁脱敏剂,C组用可乐丽菲露SE-Bond,D组用极固宁与可乐丽菲露SE-Bond联合治疗。脱敏治疗15 min,3、6个月后对牙本质的敏感程度进行疗效分析。结果 A、B、C组在脱敏治疗15min,3、6个月后的疗效差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),D组疗效明显优于A、B、C组(P<0.05)。结论极固宁与可乐丽菲SE-Bond联合治疗对因超声波和喷砂联合洁牙引起的牙本质过敏有较好的临床治疗效果。Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of Gluma,Greenor and Cleafil SE-Bond in the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity.Methods A total of 180 patients who underwent ultrasonic cleaning and sandblasting scaling between October 2009 and April 2011 were randomly treated with Gluma(group A,n=45),Greenor(group B,n=45),Cleafil SE Bond(group C,n=45) or a combination of Greenor and Cleafil SE-Bond(group D,n=45).The dentin sensitivity was determined 15 minutes and 3 and 6 months after desensitization treatment.Results There were no significant differences in curative effect after desensitization treatment among group A,B and C(P>0.05),but the therapeutic effect in group D was significantly greater than that in the other three groups(P<0.05).Conclusion The combined treatment with Greenor and Cleafil SE-Bond is effective for dentine hypersensitivity caused by ultrasonic cleaning and sandblasting scaling.

关 键 词：GLUMA 可乐丽菲露SE-Bond 极固宁 牙本质过敏 

分 类 号：R781.23[医药卫生—口腔医学]