口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (1): 51-55.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2022.01.011

• 牙髓病学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

微创器械联合单尖法在张口受限患者根管治疗中的应用

戴聪1,2, 汪磊1,2,3*   

  1. 1.安徽医科大学合肥口腔临床学院 安徽 合肥 230001;
    2.安徽医科大学第五临床学院 安徽 合肥 230001;
    3.合肥市口腔医院综合科 安徽 合肥 230001
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-19 出版日期:2022-01-28 发布日期:2022-01-21
  • 通讯作者: * 汪磊,E-mail:luoxiaxyxy@sina.com
  • 作者简介:戴聪(1996~ ),女,湖北麻城人,硕士在读,研究方向:牙体牙髓病学。
  • 基金资助:
    2021安徽医科大学校科研基金项目(编号:2021xkj248);2021合肥市卫生健康委应用医学研究项目合卫科教(编号:Hwk2021zc003)

Application of Minimally Invasive Instrument Combined with Single-cone Obturation in Root Canal Treatment of Patients with Restricted Mouth Opening

DAI Cong1,2, WANG Lei1,2,3*   

  1. 1. Hefei College of School of Stomatology, Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230001, China;
    2. The Fifth Clinical Medical Collegeg of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230001, China;
    3. Hefei Stomatolgoy Hospital, Hefei 230001, China
  • Received:2021-08-19 Online:2022-01-28 Published:2022-01-21

PDF (PC)

418

摘要： 目的:评价M3微创镍钛器械联合单尖法在张口受限患者磨牙根管治疗中的临床效果。方法:选取2020年1~8月不能完全进行常规根管治疗的张口受限的牙髓疾病患者90例,随机分为两组。观察组采用M3微创镍钛器械预备根管结合单尖法充填,对照组采用Protaper Gold预备根管结合热牙胶垂直加压充填。对两组各项指标及治疗效果进行分析。结果:观察组根管治疗可行率高于对照组,但两组差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。对照组根管根管预备时间、充填时间较短,两组差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。成功率、适充率、疼痛发生率两组差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。结论:M3微创器械预备联合单尖法充填在张口受限患者磨牙根管治疗的可行率更高,更省时,是一种有效的治疗方法。

关键词: 张口受限, 微创器械, 单尖法

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the Clinical effect of M3 minimally invasive nickel-titanium instrument combined with single-cone obturation in root canal treatment of molars in patients with restricted mouth opening. Methods: From January 2020 to August 2020, 90 patients with endodontic disease with restricted mouth opening who could not be treated with conventional root canal treatment were selected for the study, and they were randomly divided into two groups. The observation group was prepared with M3 minimally invasive instruments nickel-titanium and single-cone obturation, and the control group was prepared with Protaper Gold and warm vertical condensation. The indexes and therapeutic effects of two groups were analyzed. Results: The feasibility rate of root canal treatment in the observation group was higher than that in the control group, however, not statistically significant (P>0.05). The root canal preparation time and root canal filling time were shorter in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the success rate, proper filling rate, and pain incidence between two group (P>0.05). Conclusion: The M3 minimally invasive instrument preparation combined with Single-cone obturation has high feasibility rate and save time for the treatment of molars in patients with restricted mouth opening.

Key words: restricted mouth opening, minimally invasive instruments, single-cone obturation