两种脱敏剂在复合树脂充填治疗楔状缺损的疗效观察

Clinical curative effects of two kinds of desensitization agents in compound resin filling for treating wedge-shaped defects

目的:比较Gluma与Single Bond脱敏剂在复合树脂充填治疗楔状缺损时的临床疗效。方法:选择本院口腔内科就诊的楔状缺损患者67例,共186颗前牙,按就诊顺序排列随机分为3组:治疗组(T1组):Gluma脱敏剂脱敏后光固化复合树脂充填楔状缺损;治疗组(T2组):Single Bond脱敏剂脱敏后光固化复合树脂充填;对照组:用光固化复合树脂直接充填,统一临床检查标准下对有效率(术后即刻,3个月和6个月复查)进行统计分析。结果:各治疗组与对照组之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),但两治疗组组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:用复合树脂充填治疗楔状缺损前使用Gluma或Single Bond脱敏剂脱敏治疗均可有效减少充填术后牙齿敏感症状的出现。

Objective：To compare the clinical curative effect of Gluma desensitization agents and Single Bond desensitization agents in compound resin filling for treating wedge-shaped defects.Methods：Sixty-seven patients with 147 wedge-shaped defects front teeth treated in our hospital were randomly divided into three groups.The treatment group（group T1） was treated with routine light-cured compound resin filling after desensitization by Gluma desensitization agent,the treatment group（group T2） was treated with routine light-cured compound resin filling after desensitization by Single Bond desensitization agent and the control group was treated with routine light-cured compound resin directly filling,respectively.The clinical efficiency（right after treatment,at postoperative 3-month and 6-month follow-up） were recorded and statistically analyzed.Results：There was statistically significant difference in clinical efficiency between treatment groups and control group（P0.05）,but there was no statistically significant difference in clinical efficiency between the two treatment groups（P0.05）.Conclusion：Before compound resin filling wedge-shaped defects,using Gluma desensitization agents or Single Bond desensitization agents can effectively reduce the postoperative sensitive symptoms.