现代医药卫生
現代醫藥衛生
현대의약위생
MODERN MEDICINE HEALTH
2015年
2期
176-178,181
,共4页
龚娟%张敬%沙晶晶%姜宪娇
龔娟%張敬%沙晶晶%薑憲嬌
공연%장경%사정정%강헌교
根管疗法%根管充填%镍%钛%疼痛
根管療法%根管充填%鎳%鈦%疼痛
근관요법%근관충전%얼%태%동통
Root canal therapy%Root canal obturation%Nickel%Titanium%Pain
目的:比较2种机用镍钛根管预备器械TF和Protaper在根管预备中的临床应用效果。方法将2013年3月至2014年5月宁夏医科大学总医院口腔内科门诊就诊患者需进行根管治疗的82颗患牙随机分成TF组(42颗)和Protaper组(40颗)。TF组患牙采用TF锉,Protaper组患牙采用Protaper锉,分别测量两组患牙各根管的弯曲度,比较两组不同程度弯曲根管的根管预备时间、并发症和根管成形及充填效果。结果 TF组根管预备时间[(24.50±9.49)s]明显短于Protaper组[(46.31±26.08)s],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组根管预备时器械损伤情况、根管预备术后疼痛发生情况、根管成形及充填效果比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组根管预备时间均随着根管弯曲度的增加而增长。结论TF和Protaper 锉预备根管时根管成形效果均较好,与Protaper锉相比,TF锉根管预备时间更短,切割效率更高;TF和Protaper锉预备根管时,随着根管弯曲度的增加,根管预备时间增长。
目的:比較2種機用鎳鈦根管預備器械TF和Protaper在根管預備中的臨床應用效果。方法將2013年3月至2014年5月寧夏醫科大學總醫院口腔內科門診就診患者需進行根管治療的82顆患牙隨機分成TF組(42顆)和Protaper組(40顆)。TF組患牙採用TF銼,Protaper組患牙採用Protaper銼,分彆測量兩組患牙各根管的彎麯度,比較兩組不同程度彎麯根管的根管預備時間、併髮癥和根管成形及充填效果。結果 TF組根管預備時間[(24.50±9.49)s]明顯短于Protaper組[(46.31±26.08)s],差異有統計學意義(P<0.05);兩組根管預備時器械損傷情況、根管預備術後疼痛髮生情況、根管成形及充填效果比較,差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05);兩組根管預備時間均隨著根管彎麯度的增加而增長。結論TF和Protaper 銼預備根管時根管成形效果均較好,與Protaper銼相比,TF銼根管預備時間更短,切割效率更高;TF和Protaper銼預備根管時,隨著根管彎麯度的增加,根管預備時間增長。
목적:비교2충궤용얼태근관예비기계TF화Protaper재근관예비중적림상응용효과。방법장2013년3월지2014년5월저하의과대학총의원구강내과문진취진환자수진행근관치료적82과환아수궤분성TF조(42과)화Protaper조(40과)。TF조환아채용TF촤,Protaper조환아채용Protaper촤,분별측량량조환아각근관적만곡도,비교량조불동정도만곡근관적근관예비시간、병발증화근관성형급충전효과。결과 TF조근관예비시간[(24.50±9.49)s]명현단우Protaper조[(46.31±26.08)s],차이유통계학의의(P<0.05);량조근관예비시기계손상정황、근관예비술후동통발생정황、근관성형급충전효과비교,차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05);량조근관예비시간균수착근관만곡도적증가이증장。결론TF화Protaper 촤예비근관시근관성형효과균교호,여Protaper촤상비,TF촤근관예비시간경단,절할효솔경고;TF화Protaper촤예비근관시,수착근관만곡도적증가,근관예비시간증장。
Objective To compare the TF and Protaper two nickel-titanium root canal preparation system in the clinical effect of root canal preparation. Methods A total of 82 offending teeth required root canal treatment were randomly divided into two groups,ie,TF group(42) with TF filing and Protaper group(40) with Protaper filing. The root canal curvature degree of each root canal teeth in the two groups was measured. The different degrees of curved root canal root canal preparation time ,complica-tions and results were compared. Results Root canal preparation time TF group[(24.50±9.49)s] was obviously shorter than that of Protaper group[(46.31±26.08)s],which had statistically different significance;Two sets of equipment damage,the root canal preparation postoperative pain occurrence,the root canal shaping and filling effects were not significantly different(P>0.05). The root canal preparation time of the two groups was increased with growth of the root canal curvature degree. Conclusion TF and Protaper root canal file when root canals are better. Compared with Protaper group ,the TF group is shorter in root canal preparation time,higher cutting efficiency. The heavier the root canal curvature degree,the longer the root canal preparation time become.