论文部分内容阅读
目的对比Vitapex、AH-Plus和氧化锌丁香油三种根充糊剂在根充后的治疗效果。方法选择符合治疗适应证慢性牙髓炎或慢性根尖周炎患者150例150颗牙齿,男79例,女71例,年龄7～68岁,随机分为3组:分别用3种根充糊剂根管充填,并进行1周、3个月疗效观察。结果 Vitapex组49例中成功46例,失败3例,成功率93.88%;AH-Plus组48例中成功45例,失败3例,成功率93.75%;ZOE组53例中成功43例,失败10例,成功81.13%率;成功率Vitapex组与AH-Plus组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),Vitapex组与ZOE组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),AH-Plus组与ZOE组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 Vitapex糊剂和AH-Plus糊剂用于根管充填,疗效无明显差异,但均明显优于氧化锌丁香油糊剂。
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of three root-filling agents Vitapex, AH-Plus and zinc oxide clove oil after root filling. Methods 150 patients with 150 cases of chronic pulpitis or chronic apical periodontitis, including 79 males and 71 females, aged 7-68 years, were randomly divided into 3 groups: Root canal filling, and 1 week, 3 months efficacy. Results Among 49 cases in Vitapex group, 46 cases were successful and 3 cases failed, with a success rate of 93.88%. Forty-eight cases in AH-Plus group were successful in 45 cases, with failure in 3 cases and a success rate of 93.75%. In 53 cases of ZOE group, 43 cases were successful and failed 10 The success rate of Vitapex group and AH-Plus group was no significant difference (P> 0.05), Vitapex group and ZOE group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05), AH-Plus group and There was significant difference in ZOE group (P <0.05). Conclusion Vitapex paste and AH-Plus paste for root canal filling, no significant difference in efficacy, but were significantly better than zinc oxide clove oil paste.