摘要
目的:比较Beefill2in1热牙胶系统两种根管充填方法的充填效果。方法:纳入牙髓病、根尖周病患者180例并随机分为2组(n=90)。实验组用Beefill2in1热牙胶联合冷牙胶侧方垂直加压法充填根管,对照组单纯用热牙胶垂直加压法充填根管。对比两组方法在操作中容易出现的问题(携热器不能将牙胶尖上部取出、携热器向上拔出时将牙胶尖一同带出、根管热牙胶端有气泡、根尖段充填不严密)、根充恰填率及1年后临床疗效。结果:实验组较对照组操作失误概率低。患牙恰填率实验组(97.8%)高于对照组(83.85%)(P<0.05);实验组1年后成功率(98.9%)高于对照组(87.8%)(P<0.05)。结论:Beefill2in1热牙胶垂直加压联合冷牙胶侧方加压法较单纯热牙胶垂直加压法充填根管的临床疗效好。
AIM ： To compare the therapeutic efficacy of two obturation methods with warm guttaperchaby u-sing Beefill2inl in root canal therapy. METHODS： 180 patients with the need of root canal therapy（ RCT） were ran-domly divided into 2 groups（n =90） . In group A, Beefill2inl warm vertical condensation technique combined with the cold lateral condensation was used,while in group B, only gutta - percha Beefill2inl warm vertical conensation tech-nique was used. Procedural errors in the the obturation （i. e. ,voids, underfill caused by accidentally pulling out upper part of guttapercha, or under extended obturation and overfill） , the rate of proper obturation and the success rate of RCT in both groups were compared. RESULTS ： The error rate of obturation in group A was comparatively lower than that in group B（P 〈 0. 05） . Proper obturation rate in group A and group B was 97. 8% and 83. 85% respectively（P 〈 0.05）, 1 - year - success rate of RCT was 98.9% in group A and 87. 8% respectively（ P 〈 0. 05 ） . CONCLITION： Combination of Beefill2inl warm vertical condensation technique with Cold lateral condensation technique can result in better root canal filling than the single use.
出处
《牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志》
CAS
2017年第5期284-286,275,共4页
Chinese Journal of Conservative Dentistry
