三种牙胶尖切断器在根管治疗中的使用效果研究

Functional comparison research among three gutta-percha cutter in Root Canal Therapy

目的：采用自制新型牙胶尖切断器行根管治疗,并与2#粘固粉充填器、电加热式牙胶尖切断器行根管治疗的使用效果进行比较。方法：随机选取符合条件的单根管离体牙30颗（1~30#）,三根管离体牙30颗（31~60#）。其中离体牙1~10#为A组,11~20#为B组,21~30#为C组;31~40#为D组,41~50#为E组,51~60#为F组。分别使用2#粘固粉充填器（作用于A组和D组）、新型牙胶尖切断器（作用于B组和E组）、电加热式牙胶尖切断器（作用于C组和E组）加热后切断经侧方加压充填后的所有离体牙牙胶尖。比较三种器械切除各对应组牙胶尖所需的时间以及三种器械加热8 s后的温度变化。结果：三种牙胶尖切断器在单根管A、B、C三组切断牙胶尖所用时间比较差异均有统计学意义（F=65.659,P〈0.05）。三种牙胶尖切断器在三根管D、E、F三组切断牙胶尖所用时间比较差异均有统计学意义（F=115.543,P〈0.05）。操作时间新型牙胶尖切断器低于粘固粉充填器,电加热式牙胶尖切断器低于新型牙胶尖切断器。三种器械加热8 s后的温度变化具有差别。结论：新型牙胶尖切断器用于根管治疗中冷牙胶的切断,其临床操作时间短,效率高,成本低,并在灭菌消毒后可反复使用。

Objective： To use a new kind of gutta-percha cutter into root canal therapy, and to compare the function among new gutta-percha cutter. 2# durelon plugger and the electric heating and 30 three-root-canal teeth（signed 31 - 60#） ligible. Put 1#- 10# into group A, Put ii#Z 20# into goup B, and 21#-30# into group C. Put 31-40#into group D, Put 41-50# into group E, and 51-60# into group F. Filling mot canals of all teeth by the lateral pressure way, respectively use 2# durelon plugger, the new gutta-percha cutter and the electric heating gutta-percha cutter to cut the needless gutta-percha of the group A .and D, B and.E,C and F, and record.the operation time. iknd draw a line graph to compare the-temperature change after these three kinds of cutter heated by 8 seconds. Results： The time of three kinds of cutter took in each single-root-canal teeth groups had statistical significance（F=65.659, P〈0.05）. Three kinds of cutter took in each three-mot-canal teeth groups had statistical significance（F= 115.543, P〈0.05）.new cutter. Temperature change of the three cutter after 8 seconds, heating is different. Conclusion： The new cutter is great both in operating time, cost and disinfection, and recommend to be widely used in mot canal therapy in clinical.