玻璃纤维桩加强充填法和简单充填法修复穿髓型楔状缺损的比较研究

The comparative study of the wedge-shaped defect with pulp exposure restored by glass-fiber-post-strengthened filling and the simple filling method

目的:比较玻璃纤维桩加强充填法和简单充填法修复穿髓型楔状缺损的临床效果。方法:选择41例女性患者的48颗有穿髓型楔状缺损的前磨牙,完善的根管治疗后,24颗采用加强充填法修复,24颗采用采用简单充填法修复。对修复体使用两年后的临床效果进行评价。利用SPSS18.0统计学软件的四格表卡方检验比较修复成功率的大小,检验水准为α=0.05。结果:加强充填法修复的牙齿未出现牙折或桩不密合的情况,有两颗出现继发龋;简单充填法修复的牙齿,三颗充填物脱落,一颗出现继发龋,四颗出现牙折,两种修复方法的临床疗效差异有显著性(P<0.05),前者临床疗效好于后者。结论:加强充填法可以有效地保护根管治疗后的穿髓型楔状缺损患牙,简单充填法不能有效地保护此类患牙。

Objective：To compare the clinical effect of the wedge-shaped defect with pulp exposure restored by strengthened filling method by glass fiber post and the simple filling method.Method：A total of 48 premolar teeth with wedge-shaped defect with pulp exposure from 41 women were examined. After perfect root canal therapy, 24 of them were restored by strengthened filling method, and 24 of them were restored by simple filling method. The clinical effect was evaluated 2 years after the prostheses rehabilitation. The success rate of restoration were compared usingχ^2 Test, and the statistical significance （α=0.05） of the results was determined. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 18.0 software package.Results：In strengthened filling group, no tooth fracture occured, and two secondary caries were recorded; while in simple filling group, three restorations fell out, one secondary caries and four fractures occured. The difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）.Conclusion：The strengthened filling method can protect the wedge-shaped defect with pulp exposure after root canal therapy more effectively than the simple filling method.