摘要
目的比较ProTaper机用镍钛根管器械和ProTaper手用镍钛器械的应用效果。方法 533颗患牙,共1135个根管随机分为两组,分别采用ProTaper机用和手用镍钛根管器械预备根管,根管充填后比较两组根管预备所用操作时间,术后IAE发生率,一年后成功率。结果机用器械组每个根管的操作时间明显少于手用器械组(P<0.05),术后IAE发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)一年成功率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05。)结论机用与手用ProTaper镍钛器械在根管预备中疗效无明显差异。机用镍钛器械可以使临床操作时间明显缩短,使用过程中扭力大小可控,转速均匀,比手用镍钛器械更安全。临床工作者应根据具体情况选择合适的器械。
Objective To investigate the effects of root canal treatment with nickel-titannium files for handle use and nickel-titannium rotary instruments.Methods 533 teeth with 1135 root canals were devided into two groups randomly,group A were prepared by nickel-titannium rotary instruments and group B were prepared by nickel-titannium files for handle use with crown down technique,two groups were filled with cold vertical condensation technique.Record root canal preparation time and IAE（endodontic interappointment emergencies） of two groups,evaluate success rate after one year.Results With nickel-titannium rotary instruments,the operating time was shorter than group B（P＆lt;0.05）,and there were no significant difference between two groups of IAE and success rate after one year（P＆gt;0.05）.Conclusion There were no significant difference between two groups for clinical effects,the time of root canal prepararation with nickel-titannium rotary instruments were shorter than that with nickel-titannium files for handle use,nickel-titannium rotary instruments showed better ability whereas nickel-titannium files for handle use was time-saving,safer cause of controlled torque force and even rotation rate.
出处
《中国实用医药》
2013年第14期50-51,共2页
China Practical Medicine
关键词
根管治疗
镍钛器械
Root canal treatment
Nickel-titannium instruments
