摘要
目的比较采用2种根管封闭剂,3种不同充填技术的根尖封闭情况,为临床应用提供依据。方法选取新近拔除142颗单根管前牙采用Pro Taper机动镍钛锉系统冠向下法根管预备至F2,随即分为6个实验组(每组20颗牙)和2个对照组(每组5颗牙),采用iRoot SP与AH-Plus两种糊剂结合单尖法,热牙胶垂直加压法和冷侧压法进行根管充填,即单尖iRoot SP组(A组),热牙胶iRoot SP组(B组),冷侧压iRoot SP组(C组),单尖AH-Plus组(D组),热牙胶AH-Plus组(E组),冷侧压AH-Plus组(F组),阳性对照组(G组),阴性对照组(H组),采用染料渗透法观察根尖微渗漏情况。剩余牙齿随机分组充填后扫描电镜观察牙根横断面情况。结果各组间比较B组微渗漏值最小,B、E两组显著小于A、C、D、F组(P<0.05),B组微渗漏值小于E组,但是无显著性差别(P>0.05)。扫描电镜下观察iRoot SP与根管壁结合情况优于AH-Plus。结论连续波热牙胶垂直加压法优于其他根管充填方法,iRoot SP与根管壁的结合更好。
Objective To investigate the effect of different root canal obturation techniques on apical sealing in single root canals. Methods A total of 142 recently extracted single-rooted teeth were randomly divided into 8 groups,including single point iRoot SP group( group A),warm gutta percha iRoot SP group( group B),cold gutta percha iRoot SP group( group C),single point AH-Plus group( group D),warm gutta percha AH-Plus group( group E),cold gutta percha AH-Plus group( group F),positive control group( group G) and negative control group( group H). Apical sealing ability of six groups was evaluated with methylene blue staining and scanning electron microscopy( SEM). Results The depth of dye penetration into the root in group B and group E were significantly lower than that in group A,C,D and F( P〈0. 05). The depth of penetration in group B was lower than group E,but there was no significant difference( P〈0. 05). The SEM showed that the width between iRoot SP and dentine was smaller than AH-Plus. Conclusion In root canal treatment,warm gutta percha condensation technology can achieve better sealing effect,and the apical sealing ability of iRoot SP was better than that of AH-Plus.
作者
刘昭娜
路丽
郭立华
朱
章晓君
LIU Zhao-na;LU Li;GUO Li-hua;ZHU Jie;ZHANG Xiao-jun(Department of Stomatology,Beijing Longfu Hospital,Beijing 100010,China)
出处
《北京口腔医学》
CAS
2018年第4期228-231,共4页
Beijing Journal of Stomatology
关键词
根管充填
根管封闭剂
微渗漏
扫描电镜
Root canal obturation
Root canal scaler
Micro leakage
SEM