摘要
目的评价GuttaFlow常温流动牙胶在下颌第二磨牙C形根管中的疗效。方法选择需要治疗的下颌第二磨牙C形根管76例80颗牙,随机分为两组,每组40颗牙,实验组常温流动牙胶+牙胶尖充填根管,对照组碧兰糊剂+冷牙胶尖侧压充填根管。比较两组在充填时间、X线片根管充填质量、术后1周内疼痛以及术后1年复查疗效。结果实验组充填时间平均每根管65 s,对照组425 s;实验组术后疼痛3例,对照组16例;实验组根管适充37颗牙(92.5%),对照组根管适充29颗牙(72.5%)。实验组成功39例(97.5%),对照组成功32例(80.0%),两组差异有显著性(P<0.05)。结论常温流动牙胶在下颌第二磨牙C形根管中充填简便疗效显著,值得在临床上推广应用。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of GuttaFlow in C-shaped canals in mandibular second molars. Methods Select 80 teeth in 76 cases of C-shaped canals in mandibular second molars that needed treatment. The teeth were randomly divided into two groups ,40 in each. Root canals in the experimental group were filled with GuttaFlow and gutta-percha points. Root canals in the control group were filled with cortisomol and dealed with cold lateral condensation of gutta-percha. Compare the filling time, quality of root canal filling according to X-ray photos, pain within one week after the treatment, and curative effects one year after the treatment. Results The filling time of experimental group was obviously shorter than that of the control group, averagely 65 s and 425 s respectively. Three cases in the experimental group had postoperative pain, while 16 cases in the control group and postoperative pain. Numbers of teeth got adequate root canal filling were 37 in the experimental group （92.5%） and 29 in the control group （72.5%）. Numbers of teeth with succesful root canal filling were 39 in the experimental group （97.5%） and 32 in the control group（80.0% ）. The difference was sig- nificant between two groups （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusions GuttaFlow is easy to operate in filling of C-shaped canals in mandibular second molars. It＇s effective and worth popularization and application in clinics.
出处
《口腔医学》
CAS
2012年第9期535-537,共3页
Stomatology
基金
南通市科学技术局基金资助课题(S2010059)
