锥形束CT评价3种根管充填方法的再治疗效率

›› 2019, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (8): 706-709.

锥形束CT评价3种根管充填方法的再治疗效率

李俊亮¹,黎景景¹,高雅凡¹,钱雅洁¹,杨卫东²

1. 南京大学医学院附属口腔医院.南京市口腔医院
2. 南京大学医学院附属口腔医院南京市口腔医院

收稿日期:2018-03-26 修回日期:2018-04-17 出版日期:2019-08-28 发布日期:2019-08-23
通讯作者: 杨卫东 E-mail:ywdong2001@163.com
基金资助:
南京市卫生局医学科技发展一般项目;江苏省社发面上项目;南京市科委-医疗专项

Evaluation of retreatment efficiency of four kinds of root canal filling techniques with cone beam computer tomography

Received:2018-03-26 Revised:2018-04-17 Online:2019-08-28 Published:2019-08-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： ［摘要］目的锥形束CT扫描评价3种方法根管充填后采用Mtwo-R再治疗的效率。方法 30颗离体单根管下颌前磨牙，截冠后使用Mtwo镍钛锉根管预备，随机分为3组，每组10颗牙，分别采用GuttaFlow常温流动牙胶充填、iRoot SP单尖法充填和冷牙胶侧方加压充填。Mtwo-R再治疗锉去除根充物，记录再治疗所用时间。再治疗前后分别进行CBCT 扫描，超声荡洗2 min，再次CBCT 扫描，测量Mtwo-R再治疗后及超声荡洗后根管充填材料体积，计算剩余根管充填材料体积百分比。结果操作时间GuttaFlow组＜冷侧压组＜iRoot SP组，各组间均有统计学差异（P<0.05）。Mtwo-R再治疗后剩余充填材料体积百分比GuttaFlow组＜冷侧压组＜iRoot SP组，GuttaFlow组与其他2组之间均有显著性差异（P<0.05），而冷侧压组与iRoot SP组之间无显著性差异（P>0.05）。超声荡洗后剩余充填材料体积百分比GuttaFlow组＜iRoot SP组＜冷侧压组。GuttaFlow组显著低于其他2组（P<0.05），iRoot SP组与冷侧压组间无显著性差异（P>0.05）。在辅助超声荡洗后，3组剩余充填材料体积百分比均显著降低（P<0.05）。结论根管再治疗后3组均会残留根管充填材料，常温流动牙胶充填后充填材料更容易被去除，iRoot SP最不容易被清除，辅助超声荡洗能提高iRoot SP的清除率。

关键词: 锥形束CT, 根管再治疗, 根管充填技术, 超声

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the retreatment efficiency of three root canal filling technique with Mtwo-R using cone beam computer tomography(CBCT) scan. Methods: 30 human mandibular premolar with a single straight root canal was prepared with MTwo.They were divided into three groups randomly, each group had 10 teeth, obturated with GuttaFlow, iRoot SP with single point and cold lateral condensation. Mtwo-R file was used to remove the filling material, the treatment time was recorded, CBCT scanning was performed before and after retreatment. Ultrasonic swings for 2 minutes, and then CBCT scan again. Volume changes of root canal filling materials after Mtwo-R treatment and ultrasonic swallowing were observed, and volume percentage of remaining root canal filling materials was calculated. Results:The operation time of GuttaFlow group < cold lateral condensation group <iRoot SP group, there was significant difference between each group(P>0.05).After Mtwo-R treatment, the volume percentage of residual material of GuttaFlow group <cold lateral condensation group <iRoot SP group.There was significant difference between GuttaFlow group and the other 2 groups(P<0.05), while there was no significant difference between the cold lateral condensation group and the iRoot SP group (P>0.05). After ultrasonic wash,the volume percentage of residual material of GuttaFlow group <iRoot SP group < cold lateral condensation group.The GuttaFlow group was significantly lower than the other 2 groups(P<0.05).There was no significant difference between the iRoot SP group and cold lateral condensation group (P>0.05).The volume percentage of the 3 groups of residual materials decreased after auxiliary ultrasonic wash were significantly decreased (P<0.05). Conclusion:Residual root canal filling materials were retained in all 3 groups.GuttaFlow was easier to be removed and iRoot SP was not easy to be removed.Additional ultrasonic wash could improve the clearance rate of iRoot SP.

Key words: CBCT, Root canal retreatment, Root canal filling technique, Ultrasonic

中图分类号:

R781.05

李俊亮黎景景高雅凡钱雅洁杨卫东. 锥形束CT评价3种根管充填方法的再治疗效率[J]. , 2019, 39(8): 706-709.

参考文献 17

[1]	周耀, 周洲, 贡艳宏, 等.常温流动牙胶充填下颌第二磨牙形根管密合性的评价[J].口腔医学, 2013, 33(11):748-751.
[2]	黎景景, 李俊亮, 高雅凡, 等.不同根充止点下预备根管对常温流动牙胶充填质量的影响[J].口腔疾病防治, 2018, 26(1):26-30.
[3]	Lambor RT, De AN, Chalakkal P, et al.An in vitro comparison between the apical sealing abilities of resilon with Epiphany sealer and gutta-percha with AH plus sealer[J].Indian J Dent Res, 2012, 23(5):694.
[4]	Y?lmaz F,Ko? C,Kamburo?lu K, et al.Evaluation of 3 Different Retreatment Techniques in Maxillary Molar Teeth by Using Micro-computed Tomography[J].J Endod, 2017, 10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.006.
[5]	Khedmat S, Azari A, Shamshiri AR, et al.Efficacy of ProTaper and Mtwo Retreatment Files in Removal of Gutta-percha and GuttaFlow from Root Canals[J].Iran Endod J, 2016, 11(3):184-187
[6]	黎景景, 陈苏蕾, 李俊亮等.种充填方法对椭圆形根管根尖超填及封闭性能的影响[J].口腔医院研究, 2017, 33(10):1036-1039.
[7]	Silveira SB, Alves FRF, Marceliano-Alves MF, et al.Removal of Root Canal Fillings in Curved Canals Using Either Mani GPR or HyFlex NT Followed by Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation[J].J Endod, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.012.
[8]	Crozeta BM, Silva-Sousa YT, Leoni GB, et al.Micro-Computed Tomography Study of Filling Material Removal from Oval-shaped Canals by Using Rotary,Reciprocating,and Adaptive Motion Systems[J].J Endod, 2016, 42(5):793-797.
[9]	Pawar AM, Thakur B, Metzger Z, et al.The efficacy of the Self-Adjusting File versus WaveOne in removal of root filling residue that remains in oval canals after the use of ProTaper retreatment files: A cone-beam computed tomography study[J].J Conserv Dent, 2016, 19(1):72-76.
[10]	Khedmat S, Azari A, Shamshiri AR, et al.Efficacy of ProTaper and Mtwo Retreatment Files in Removal of Gutta-percha and GuttaFlow from Root Canals[J].Iran Endod J, 2016, 11(3):184-187
[11]	Siotia J,Acharya SR,Gupta SK,et al..Effcacy of ProTaper Retreatment System in Root Canals Obturated with Gutta-Percha Using Two Different Sealers and GuttaFlow[J].Int J Dent. 2011, 2011:676128.
[13]	Akcay M, Arslan H, Durmus N, et al.Dentinal Tubule Penetration of AH Plus,iRoot SP,MTA Fillapex,and GuttaFlow Bioseal Root Canal Sealers After Different Final Irrigation Procedures:A Confocal Microscopic Study[J].Lasers Surg Med, 2016, 48(1):70-76.
[14]	Loushine BA, Bryan TE, Looney SW, et al.Setting properties and cytotoxicity evaluation of a premixed bioceramic root canal sealer[J].J Endod, 2011, 37(5):673-677.
[15]	Silveira SB, Alves FRF, Marceliano-Alves MF, et al.Removal of Root Canal Fillings in Curved Canals Using Either Mani GPR or HyFlex NT Followed by Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation[J].J Endod, 2018, 44(2):299-303.
[16]	Bernardes RA, Duarte MA, Vivan RR, et al.Comparison of three retreatment techniques with ult5rasonic activation in flattened canals using micro-computed tomography and scanning electron microscopy[J].Int Endod J, 2016, 49:890-897.
[17]	Keles A, Kamalak A, Keskin C, et al.The efficacy of laser,ultrasound and self-adjustable file in removing smear layer debris from oval root canals following retreatment: A scanning electron microscopy study[J].Aust Endod J, 2016, 42(3):104-111.

[1]	马巍王涛. 低频超声对牙菌斑生物膜促渗作用的研究进展[J]. , 2019, 39(2): 179-182.
[2]	顾烨辰朱庆萍吴大明. 上颌后牙根尖周病变与上颌窦底病理影响关系的锥形束CT研究[J]. , 2019, 39(1): 35-39.
[3]	俞晓霏吴大明汪信洋刘卫红. 210例根管治疗失败病例的根尖X线片和锥形束CT的影像学分析[J]. , 2018, 38(6): 533-536.
[4]	许珂张圆缪伟男陈文静. 上气道分析的研究进展[J]. , 2018, 38(6): 573-576.
[5]	陈勇闵丽. 机用镍钛器械与超声根管冲洗联合应用于慢性根尖周炎一次性根管治疗的临床研究[J]. , 2018, 38(2): 162-165.
[6]	景双林黄丽娟于金华. 显微超声技术结合CBCT治疗前磨牙复杂变异根管的效果观察[J]. , 2018, 38(12): 1092-1095.
[7]	宋悦李中武吴亚平王东苗周广超杨建荣. 46例异位下颌第三磨牙及伴发病变的临床病例分析[J]. , 2018, 38(11): 995-998.
[8]	苑子艺刘莉柯华峰刘冉冉. 非拔牙正畸治疗牙槽嵴高度变化的CBCT研究[J]. , 2018, 38(11): 1011-1014.
[9]	刘宇廖骞赵隽隽朱亚琴. 钙化根管临床治疗的研究进展[J]. , 2018, 38(10): 951-955.
[10]	唐路郑庆华张岚黄定明. 锥形束CT分析中国人群上颌后牙区牙槽骨及牙根与上颌窦位置关系的研究[J]. , 2018, 38(1): 23-28.
[11]	满毅. 数字化技术在口腔种植修复中的应用[J]. , 2017, 37(7): 577-582.
[12]	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.
[13]	李宜宸乌兰其其格. 上颌阻生尖牙诊断与治疗的研究进展[J]. , 2017, 37(2): 188-192.
[14]	瞿灵丽徐艳李璐. 自酸蚀和选择性酸蚀釉质处理下SonicFillTM超声树脂充填系统修复后牙Ⅱ类洞微渗漏的体外研究[J]. , 2017, 37(12): 1057-1060.
[15]	许姚万宏坤沈海燕丁水清吴锦涛. 不同方法去除根管内充填物的体外试验观察[J]. , 2017, 37(12): 1066-1069.