机构地区:[1]南昌大学附属口腔医院(江西省口腔生物医学重点实验室,江西省口腔疾病临床医学研究中心),江西南昌330006 [2]中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第九〇八医院
出 处:《中国医学创新》2022年第35期18-22,共5页Medical Innovation of China
基 金:江西省卫生健康委科技计划项目课题(SKJP220211786)。
摘 要:目的:分析不同器械预备根尖发育完全的恒磨牙弯曲根管的临床疗效。方法:将南昌大学附属口腔医院口腔科2019年1月-2021年12月收治的120例根尖发育完全的恒磨牙根尖周炎患者纳入研究,以随机数字表法分为三组,对照组采用Dentsply K锉,观察A组采用ProTaper Next镍钛锉,观察B组采用XP-endo Shaper镍钛锉,对比三组根管充填质量、弯曲度及根管预备时间、“根管治疗约诊间疼痛”(EIAE)占比及并发症情况。结果:预备后,观察A组、观察B组充填成功率均高于对照组(χ^(2)=4.114、6.135,P=0.043、0.013),观察A组与观察B组差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.346,P=0.556);预备完成1 d,三组前磨牙、磨牙根管弯曲度较预备前均显著下降(前磨牙:t=2.634、3.410、2.584,P=0.016、0.001、0.013;磨牙:t=2.391、3.776、2.333,P=0.022、0.000、0.025),三组预备后前磨牙、磨牙根管弯曲度比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察A组及观察B组前磨牙、磨牙根管预备时间均较对照组显著减短(前磨牙:t=4.498、5.104,磨牙:t=5.018、4.411,P<0.05),观察A组与观察B组前磨牙、磨牙根管预备时间差异均无统计学意义(t=0.529、0.057,P>0.05);观察A组(15.0%)与观察B组(17.5%)EIAE占比显著低于对照组(37.5%)(χ^(2)=5.230、4.013,P=0.022、0.045),但观察A组与观察B组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察A组总发生率为10.0%,观察B组为7.5%,显著低于对照组的27.5%(χ^(2)=4.020、5.541,P=0.044、0.018),但观察A组与观察B组差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.156,P=0.692)。结论:ProTaper Next镍钛锉及XP-endo Shaper镍钛锉较Dentsply K锉可有效提高根管充填成功率,减短根管预备时间,降低EIAE占比,且安全性较好。Objective:To analyze the clinical effects of curved root canals of permanent molars with fully developed apex prepared with different instruments.Method:This study included 120 patients with periapical periodontitis of permanent molars with fully developed apex who were admitted to the Department of Stomatology,the Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanchang University from January 2019 to December 2021.The patients were divided into control group,observation group A and observation group B by random number table method,receiving treatment with Dentsply K file,ProTaper Next nickel-titanium file and XP-endo Shaper nickel-titanium file,respectively.The quality of root canal filling,curvature,root canal preparation time,the proportion of endodontic inter appointment emergencies (EIAE),and complications were compared among the three groups.Result:After preparation,the success rates of filling in the observation group A and observation group B were higher than that in the control group (χ^(2)=4.114,6.135;P=0.043,0.013),without significant difference between the observation group A and observation group B (χ^(2)=0.346,P=0.556).The root canal curvature of premolars and molars significantly decreased in the three groups on day 1 after preparation (premolar:t=2.634,3.410,2.584,P=0.016,0.001,0.013;molar:t=2.391,3.776,2.333,P=0.022,0.000,0.025),but there were no statistically significant differences among three groups (P>0.05).The root canal preparation time of premolars and molars in the observation group A and observation group B were significantly shorter than that in the control group (premolar:t=4.498,5.104,molar:t=5.018,4.411,P<0.05),without statistically significant differences between the observation group A and observation group B (t=0.529,0.057,P>0.05).The proportion of EIAE in the observation group A (15.0%) and the observation group B (17.5%) were significantly lower than 37.5%in the control group (χ^(2)=5.230,4.013;P=0.022,0.045),without statistically significant difference between the observation group A
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...