3种不同根管治疗器械对根管充填物清除效果的比较研究

›› 2017, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 321-324.

3种不同根管治疗器械对根管充填物清除效果的比较研究

田韵诗,方玲

大庆油田总医院

收稿日期:2016-08-18 修回日期:2016-11-21 出版日期:2017-04-28 发布日期:2017-04-11
通讯作者: 田韵诗 E-mail:738105001@qq.com

A comparative study of cleared effect of three different root canal instruments on root canal filling

Ling FANG²

Received:2016-08-18 Revised:2016-11-21 Online:2017-04-28 Published:2017-04-11

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的比较G钻+手动K锉、Protaper再治疗镍钛锉、Reciproc单只锉在根管再治疗中对牙胶的清除效果及推出根尖孔碎屑量。方法选择60颗离体单根管牙进行根管预备、充填、玻璃离子封闭30 d，随机分成3组，每组20颗，分别用G钻+不锈钢手动K锉（A组）、Protaper 再治疗锉（B组）及Reciproc单只锉（C组）去除根管充填物，采用根尖X线片和扫描电镜的方法评估根管内的充填物去除的情况，比较3组样本牙根管充填物的清除效果；记录去除充填物所用的操作时间；用称量的方法计算每组推出根尖孔的牙胶碎屑的量。结果 3组样本牙根管壁均有残留的充填物，B，C两组根管壁残留的充填物明显低于A组（P<0.05），C组清除效果优于B组（P<0.05）。和A组相比，B，C组均可以减少再治疗时间（P<0.05）。推出根尖孔的碎屑量A组最多，其次是B组，C组最低（P<0.05）。结论镍钛器械无论是在清除效果、操作时间、推出根尖孔碎屑量上都优于手动器械；Reciproc单只锉优于Protaper再治疗锉。

关键词: 根管再治疗, 手动器械, Protaper再治疗锉, Reciproc单只锉

Abstract: Objective To compare tooth glue cleaning effect and root tip chipping removing amount in root canal retreatment among methods of G bore+manual K file， Protaper Universal retreatment and Reciproc. Methods 60 invitro single root solenoglyphic teeth were selected and root canal preparation was made， glass ionomer was filled and sealed for the teeth lasting for 30 days. Then they were divided into three groups at random， 20 in each group. Grub root canal filler was cleaned respectively with G bore+stainless manual K filing（group A）， Protaper Universal retreatment(group B) and Reciproc single filing(group C). The condition of filler removal was evaluated by root tip Xray film and scanning electron microscope. The cleaning effect of 3 groups root canal filler was compared， filler elimination operating time was recorded and the total amount of tooth glue chipping of apical foramen in each group was calculated by weighing method. Results Filler residues existed in all root canal walls of the 3 sample groups. Root canal wall filler residues in Group B and Group C were obviously less than those in Group A (P<0.05)， and eliminating effect of Group C was superior to that of group B (P<0.05). Compared to Group A， both Group B and Group A could reduce retreatment time (P<0.05). Group A removed the largest amount of root tip chipping， Group B took the second place and that of Group C was the least. Conclusion Nickeltitanium instrument is superior to manual instrument not only in cleaning effect， operating time but also in apical foramens chipping amount. Reciproc single killing as well is superior to Protaper retreatment killing.

Key words: root canal retreatment, manual instrument, Protaper Universal retreatment, Reciproc single filing

中图分类号:

R781.05

田韵诗方玲. 3种不同根管治疗器械对根管充填物清除效果的比较研究[J]. , 2017, 37(4): 321-324.

Ling FANG. A comparative study of cleared effect of three different root canal instruments on root canal filling[J]. , 2017, 37(4): 321-324.

参考文献

[1]Ng YL,Mann V,Rahbaran S,et al.Outcome of primary root cannal treatment: systermatic review of the literature----part2Influence of clinical factors[J].,Int Endod J,2008,41(1):26-31
[2]刘莹,李纾,陈亮,等.不同根管再治疗器械与氯仿联合使用去除根管充填材料效果的比较研究[J].牙体牙髓牙周病杂志,2013,(7):454-458
[3]黄轶锋,洪瑾.显微超声技术结合热牙胶充填进行根管再治疗的效果分析[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2006,20(6):576-578
[4] Zuolo AS,Jr Mello JE.Efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing filling material during root canal retreatment[J].J Endod,2013,1-7
[5]许利利,黄定明.根管再治疗中去除牙胶后根管内残留物量的体外评价方法[J].国际口腔医学杂志,2011,38(4):449-451
[6]Peters OA,Barbakow F.Effects of irrigation on debris and smear layer on canalwalls prepared by two rotary techniques: a scanning electron microscopic study[ J][J].J Endod,2000,26(1):6-
[7]方溢云,林正梅,陈巨峰.2种镍钛再治疗器械清理根管内充填材料效果比较[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2012,28(1):85-89
[8]Zohereh Khalialak,Medi Vatapour,Bahareh Dadresanfar,et al.In Vitro Comparison of Gutta-Percha Removal with H-File and Protaper with or without Chloroform[J].Int Endod J,2013,8(1):6-9
[9]石磊,唐小山,房莉,等.Hero Shaper 镍钛器械与K锉根管再治疗清理效果的比较[J].同济大学学报医学报,2012,33(4):96-101
[10]Bramante CM,Fidelis NS.Heat release,time required,and cleaning-ability of Mtwo R and Protaper Universal regtreatment systerms in the removal of filling materal[J].J Endod,2010,36:1870-1873
[11]Giuliani V,Cocchetti R,Pagavino G.Efficacy of Protaper Universal retreatment files in removing filling materials during root canal retreatment[J].J Endod,2008,34(11):1381-1384
[12]You SY,Bae KS,Baek SH,et al.Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals[J].J Endod,2010,36(12):1991-1994
[13]Yared G.Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument :preliminary observation[J].Int Endod J,2008,41(4):339-344
[14]Bane K,Faye B,Sarr M,et al.Root canal shaping by single-file systems and rotary instruments :a laboratory study[J].Int Endod J,2015,10(2):135-139
[15]Gavini G,Caldeira CL,Akisue E,et al.Resistance to flexural fatigue of Reciproc R25 files under continuous rotation and reciprocating movement[J].J Endod,2012,38(5):684-687
[16]De Frota MF,Espir CG,Berbert FL,et al.Comparison of cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance in reciprocating single-file systems and continuous rotary instrumentation systems[J].Oral Sci,2014,56(4):269-275