CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨逐层后退预备根管法、逐层深入预备根管法、ProTaper冠向下预备根管法对根管治疗患者牙齿冠部玷污层的去除效果。方法选取本院2011年10月~2013年10月诊治的牙齿冠部玷污层患者273例，采用数字随机法分为3组：91例患者采用逐层后退预备根管法治疗为Ⅰ组，91例患者采用逐层深入预备根管法治疗为Ⅱ组，91例患者采用ProTaper冠向下预备根管法治疗为Ⅲ组，比较3组患者治疗前后的根管壁污层评分、根管内玷污层菌落数以及不良事件发生率。结果治疗后，3组患者的根管壁污层评分、根管内玷污层菌落数、不良事件发生率均显著降低。Ⅱ组患者根管壁污层评分、根管内玷污层菌落数、不良事件发生率均明显低于Ⅰ组，Ⅲ组患者根管壁污层评分、根管内玷污层菌落数、不良事件发生率均明显低于Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组，差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论3种方法均是根管治疗患者牙齿冠部玷污层的有效去除方法，其中ProTaper冠向下预备根管法的去除效果最佳。
목적：탐토축층후퇴예비근관법、축층심입예비근관법、ProTaper관향하예비근관법대근관치료환자아치관부점오층적거제효과。방법선취본원2011년10월~2013년10월진치적아치관부점오층환자273례，채용수자수궤법분위3조：91례환자채용축층후퇴예비근관법치료위Ⅰ조，91례환자채용축층심입예비근관법치료위Ⅱ조，91례환자채용ProTaper관향하예비근관법치료위Ⅲ조，비교3조환자치료전후적근관벽오층평분、근관내점오층균락수이급불량사건발생솔。결과치료후，3조환자적근관벽오층평분、근관내점오층균락수、불량사건발생솔균현저강저。Ⅱ조환자근관벽오층평분、근관내점오층균락수、불량사건발생솔균명현저우Ⅰ조，Ⅲ조환자근관벽오층평분、근관내점오층균락수、불량사건발생솔균명현저우Ⅰ조화Ⅱ조，차이균유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。결론3충방법균시근관치료환자아치관부점오층적유효거제방법，기중ProTaper관향하예비근관법적거제효과최가。
ObjectiveToinvestigatetheremovaleffectofsmearlayeronpaients'toothcrownwith layer back root canal preparation method, layer-depth root canal preparation method and ProTaper crowndownrootcanalpreparationmethod.Methods 273patientswithtoothcrownsmearlayer wereselectedinourhospitalfromOctober 2011toOctober 2013.Thesepatientswererandomly dividedintothreegroups.Inthefirstgroup, 91patientsweretreatedwithlayerbackrootcanal preparationmethod.Inthesecondgroup, 91patientsweretreatedwithlayer-depthrootcanal preparationmethod.Inthethirdgroup, 91patientsweretreatedwithProTapercrowndownrootcanal preparation method. Then root canal wall smear layer scores, colony numbers of root canal smear layer and the occurence rates of adverse events before and after treatment were compared within three groups. ResuIts After treatment, root canal wall smear layer scores, colony numbers of root canal smear layer and the occurence rates of adverse events significantly decreased in three groups. Root canal wall smear layer score, colony number of root canal smear layer and the occurence rate of adverse events in the secondgroupweresignificantlylowerthanthoseinthefirstgroup (P<0.05).Rootcanalwallsmearlayer score, colony number of root canal smear layer, and the occurence rate of adverse events in the third groupweresignificantlylowerthanthoseinthefirstgroupandthesecondgroup (P<0.05).ConcIusion These three methods are effective in removing smear layer on the tooth crown of patients, while the removal effect of ProTaper crown down root canal preparation method is the best of all.